|
|
Post by Mark on May 13, 2022 10:37:42 GMT
Westminster voting intention:
LAB: 39% (-1)
CON: 34% (-)
LDEM: 11% (+1)
GRN: 6% (+1)
via @techneuk , 11 - 12 May
|
|
|
|
Post by bardin1 on May 13, 2022 10:41:51 GMT
Thanks - will be quicker to find new posts now!
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on May 13, 2022 10:54:10 GMT
Britain Elects
@britainelects
·
1h
Westminster voting intention:
LAB: 38% (+2)
CON: 33% (-2)
LDEM: 12% (+2)
GRN: 6% (-2)
via
@yougov
Chgs. w/ 06 May
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on May 13, 2022 10:56:18 GMT
"2002?"
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on May 13, 2022 10:56:22 GMT
The 1 point always looked a bit like an outlier and the Green down 2 puts to bed my theory in the last thread about having just voted in local elections having some sway on what you might put down on a poll at the same time, although I guess my theory can hold in that a week has passed so respondents might go back to thinking about General elections.
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on May 13, 2022 10:57:30 GMT
repeated from last thread
I am surprised at the stability of the polls in the circumstances and wondered whether what we have seen in cross-over last November will be a slow leak moment such as after 16 September 1992 leading to a sudden dam-burst down into the (Conservatives) 25/28 level came about a year later. Although Labour currently hovers around the 39/40 mark, if I recollect polls remained stubbornly around the 30 to 34 mark for the Conservatives for about a year after Black Wednesday with Labour in the lower 40's only reaching the higher figures again about a year later.
Thoughts (or more accurate analysis) anyone?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2022 11:01:38 GMT
Most recent polling seems to put CON at c33-34%. I can't readily recall them polling less than that of late. Has CON support bottomed out at this level, or might it still be vulnerable to possible new negative media coverage re Partygate, cost of living buffeting etc.?
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on May 13, 2022 11:03:00 GMT
FBU has voted to remain affiliated to Labour (75 to 25). This is interesting as they are a union that left Labour under Blair and rejoined a Labour Party under Corbyn.
Aslef also have a vote coming up I think, although the biggie is going to be Unite and so far it's just shots across the bow.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,590
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 13, 2022 11:08:58 GMT
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,590
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 13, 2022 11:12:55 GMT
The 1 point always looked a bit like an outlier and the Green down 2 puts to bed my theory in the last thread about having just voted in local elections having some sway on what you might put down on a poll at the same time, although I guess my theory can hold in that a week has passed so respondents might go back to thinking about General elections. My anecdotal observation is that YouGov seem more prone to these random movements up and down than other pollsters (hence my prediction that the 1% lead would revert back in their next poll, which it has). Assuming my memory is not paying tricks, is there something in their methodology that would account for it, or is it just 'noise'? |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on May 13, 2022 11:19:08 GMT
Isa,
As you know I expect a fall below 30% for the Tories and for it is stick for many months.
Doesn't look like occurring just yet, although there may be a couple within moe at any time.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on May 13, 2022 11:23:40 GMT
pjw, my theory on YG is that they have more respondents who just go with the temporary zeitgest.
So FPNs issued and they say Labour then Beergate in the news last weekend and they switch, Starmer says he would resign and they move back etc.
Typically imo these are non voters who feel obliged to respond for their vouchers.
The recent YG might just be regular moe though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 13, 2022 11:24:17 GMT
Maybe, for a while, I was mysteriously transported back in time...I'd had an evening of mellowness and chat at a friends house and was repairing to the (sadly now closed down) Rajesthan for a Shath Khkania Gohst (Not did-similar to a Jalfrezi, but, drier and much richer, made with a fusion of 'eastern spices', sadly, few places do it, but, utterly gorgeous!). My discman is equipped with 2 discs, the (then) new Death By Chocolate album, 'Zap The World'.... "If Salvador Dali and the above-mentioned H.R. Pufnstuf crew were to stage a poetry reading, Death by Chocolate would be the result. The album’s great to listen to, and there’s scads of potential lying in wait for the band. But despite the band’s supremely unique bent and experimental arch, the product’s too silly to be considered avant garde, even by ’60s standards. On the other hand, it’s too highbrow to be considered pop, even by modern rock standards"
...and a mix CD I'd made for a crush, which I'd titled "Panic In The Streets Of Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch" (which I still have, we kept missing each other and the few times we were out at the same time, I left it at home). .......alternatively, it could have just been a typo. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on May 13, 2022 11:28:55 GMT
The 1 point always looked a bit like an outlier and the Green down 2 puts to bed my theory in the last thread about having just voted in local elections having some sway on what you might put down on a poll at the same time, although I guess my theory can hold in that a week has passed so respondents might go back to thinking about General elections. My anecdotal observation is that YouGov seem more prone to these random movements up and down than other pollsters (hence my prediction that the 1% lead would revert back in their next poll, which it has). Assuming my memory is not paying tricks, is there something in their methodology that would account for it, or is it just 'noise'? I don't think that there is any doubt that YouGov's headline figures are more volatile than those of other pollsters - and have been for many years. I did once find an old Anthony Wells article which explained this, but can't lay my hands on it at the moment. One important feature of their polls is that they do not ask a 'likelyhood to vote' question as several other pollsters do. But they also have the highest proportion of any pollster of respondents who state that they 'would not vote'. Incidentlly, Techne continue to be the opposite with figures that seem to be constantly stuck in the same narrow range. |
|
|
|
Post by laszlo4new on May 13, 2022 11:37:09 GMT
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on May 13, 2022 11:59:42 GMT
Jacob Rees Mogg “We need to look at whether these rules were right in the first place in case we have a pandemic again because I think they were too restrictive.” Obviously preventing piss up karaoke events in number 10 was an egregious interference in personal choice. Utter prick They all know there were far too many restrictions. Of course they do. why do you think con MPs had begun revolting against new restrictions? They know it was all pointless, not least beause they will all have had letters from constituents pointing out the stuff I have. That really it all accomplished nothing.
Right now we are adding more and more people to waiting lists for home care. Those are the same people who were at risk from covid. Well too bad, they threw away the money that might have been used to actually help you. maybe some of those conservative core voters are going to realise what their government has done to them.
|
|
Danny
Member
Posts: 10,457
|
Post by Danny on May 13, 2022 12:05:42 GMT
Oh, and formally the DUP strike back at Stormont.
What is their strategy now? Obviously N. Ireland is capable of running without a government for years as it has already had plenty of practice. But i gather there is required to be another election in 6 months, and it will be very interetsing to see if the results change in light of the DUP boycott. Yet if I undesrtand it correctly, if their vote halved and they were relegated to 3rd place, as the largest unionist party they might still be able to veto parliament operating. Which is an untenable political situation.
So is johnson going to stick by them and see N ireland descend into chaos, or impose reforms to the settlement removing their boycot? It was only ever tenable if it had popular consent and the two unionist/republican factions dominated.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on May 13, 2022 12:19:11 GMT
Yes Danny,
Even if the DUP were in 3rd place as long as they were the biggest party (measured by the numbers of MLAs) within the second biggest designation they would have the right to appoint the deputy first minister.
For the DUP not to be in this position of power and to be able to thwart the setting up of the executive either the UUP would have to win more seats than them or the combined non-aligned number of MLAs would have to exceed the combined number of 'unionist' designated ones., both very unlikely any time soon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on May 13, 2022 12:26:31 GMT
What the....  ?? Tories donate a champagne bottle, signed by Johnson, a souveneir of partygate, to a charity auction. Did satire just die? Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on May 13, 2022 12:39:07 GMT
What the....  ?? Tories donate a champagne bottle, signed by Johnson, a souveneir of partygate, to a charity auction. Did satire just die? Chris Bryant tweeted in response that: "they really are laughing at us"  |
|
|
|
Post by wb61 on May 13, 2022 12:46:03 GMT
I was talking with some colleagues the other day, not really known for their political engagement or the LOC views they began a discussion about Gove's performance on the morning interview round. The consensus was that senior Conservatives, having seen what the PM has done without consequence, are now trying to see how far they could push things and still get away with it. It was not a humorous conversation but people expressing a serious view of what they had seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on May 13, 2022 12:49:26 GMT
about an hour ago wb61 said: I am surprised at the stability of the polls in the circumstances and wondered whether what we have seen in cross-over last November will be a slow leak moment such as after 16 September 1992 leading to a sudden dam-burst down into the 25/28 level about a year later. Although Labour currently hovers around the 39/40 mark, if I recollect polls remained stubbornly around the 30 to 34 mark for the Conservatives for about a year after Black Wednesday with Labour in the lower 40's only reaching the higher figures again about a year later.
Thoughts (or more accurate analysis) anyone?(copied from other thread) Comparing the two periods is obviously problematical due to differences in polling methodology etc - and in some polls Labour had ridiculously big leads (even before Blair became leader) back then.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_1997_United_Kingdom_general_election If you look at ICM/Guardian, who consistently gave Lab smaller leads and got close to the final %, they don't consistently start showing double digit Lab leads till '94 (and before Blair became leader). The potential narrative, as you suggest is first popular disapproval of the govt followed by a period of courtship with the opposition then a definitive switch as the opposition party does its bit as the suitor and voters flock to them.
If you look at 2010en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2010_United_Kingdom_general_election T he Tory leads start fairly shortly after the '05 election, starts climbing, then Brown gets his bounce after which the credit crunch crises hits and the Tories re-establish a lead up to the next GE - but never fully seals the deal with the electorate, despite the unpopularity of Brown and his govt, and support of most of the media for the Tories.
My sense is currently the situation is similar to 2010. Its hard to see how things could get much worse, but Labour have not convinced the electorate sufficiently to give them a mandate. Prior to '15, obvs its position in Scotland meant it's chances of obtaining an OM much higher. Given the current political reality in Scotland, the indication in the polls (which I am assuming are more accurate than in previous periods) is that Labour are way short of lead over the Conservatives it needs for an OM. While it may be fair to assume come a GE you can take a couple of % points from LD and Green to Lab this will not be sufficient to get them the required margin between themselves and the Tories.
In '97, Blair also benefited from the assumption held by everyone that he would win, and had momentum/vibe etc - currently its a lot harder for Labour generate that sense of being the government in waiting. |
|
|
|
Post by shevii on May 13, 2022 12:59:56 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on May 13, 2022 13:05:58 GMT
As I understand they weren't excluded - just restricted to 1 seat on the selection committee. More likely supporters of Jack Hemmingway who I assume KS office weren't keen on partly due to his support for Corbyn on anti-Semitism issue. I would assume most likely effect is local activist not turning up to campaign - but I'm sure the party will bus people in from elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on May 13, 2022 13:20:19 GMT
Also here in The Guardian: www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/13/wakefield-labour-executive-resigns-accusing-keir-starmer-byelection-stich-up"Starmer’s predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn, also faced accusations of stitching up local selections in order to place favoured candidates in winnable seats." It looks like nothing ever changes in the Labour party. I suspect that if people dug back in history we could find the same accusations levelled against Blair and Kinnock. I seem to remember that the late Jack Dromey was parachuted into a seat that was supposed to have an all-woman shortlist. |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on May 13, 2022 13:45:47 GMT
One of the local long listed candidates who did not make it to the short list of 2 has sent his best wishes to the 2 remaining candidates.
Seems some of the others are sore losers and are allowing their egos to encourage supporters to damage the party.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on May 13, 2022 13:51:47 GMT
Lululemon,
Re ''If you look at ICM/Guardian, who consistently gave Lab smaller leads and got close to the final %, they don't consistently start showing double digit Lab leads till '94''
ICM used the 50% swingback adjustment for Tory and Lab (1992) DKs so a forecast model rather than pure polling.
ICM were better for Lab in the run up to 2010 and for the Tories in the Coalition years but they got the LD swingback at 30% way out.
As you may recall James E from time to time will advise the board what this approach would do to a current poll (or polls) as it seems to be a better predictor than the Opinium adjustment.
|
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,590
|
Post by pjw1961 on May 13, 2022 13:54:51 GMT
Also here in The Guardian: www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/13/wakefield-labour-executive-resigns-accusing-keir-starmer-byelection-stich-up"Starmer’s predecessor, Jeremy Corbyn, also faced accusations of stitching up local selections in order to place favoured candidates in winnable seats." It looks like nothing ever changes in the Labour party. I suspect that if people dug back in history we could find the same accusations levelled against Blair and Kinnock. I seem to remember that the late Jack Dromey was parachuted into a seat that was supposed to have an all-woman shortlist. For balance, it should be noted this has happened in the Conservative Party as well - remember David Camerons's "A-list" of 'diverse' candidates for example? Not every association in a winnable seat was delighted to be told to select from the list. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_A-List |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,682
|
Post by steve on May 13, 2022 14:05:13 GMT
shevii Labour constituency parties particularly those dominated by the left always appeared to have a knack when forming circular firing squads.
|
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on May 13, 2022 14:08:10 GMT
As I understand it, the vote to determine the Labour candidate for Wakefield will go ahead on Sunday and the winner will be determined by the votes of all Wakefield CLP members. This mass resignation by the CLP Executive committee looks like self indulgent gesture politics to me. Unless all the members boycott the vote on Sunday, I don't see this navel-gazing silliness making the slightest bit of difference to either the candidate selection or by election campaign.
From my experience, CLP Executive members are a pretty unrepresentative bunch of people in terms of the broader CLP membership and are far more politically driven and committed too. Most of the membership are low profile and have much more in common with mainstream Labour voters. They'll determine the candidate on Sunday.
Labour need voters more than members. The Wakefield electorate won't be giving a toss about the sensibilities of Wakefield CLP Executive committee, I wouldn't have thought.
Nor should they either.
|
|
??
??
