Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 13:53:01 GMT
R&W's competency tracker (update due in a few hours). They helpfully show various key events. Rishi+Hunt have clawed 'competency' rating back from the Truss era error low point but not sure they can take it much further than that given the 'brand damage' and the ongoing issues of 'small boats', CoL, factional infighting, etc
|
|
|
|
Post by leftieliberal on Nov 28, 2022 13:55:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Nov 28, 2022 14:35:33 GMT
Many thanks for your contributions, James. So good there is someone posting on a polling site, who actually knows something about polling. Haha, being able to cite polling, is not the same as properly being able to explain it. Nothing James posted proves that the gain is mostly due to Starmer, as opposed to Tory implosion. It’s like the time a while back, when I suggested that some might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it, and this might have been enough to swing to Brexit. James E tried countering that by saying that actually, polling showed a majority thought Brexit would benefit them. robbiealive was quite taken with the idea this repudiated my point, but it didn’t of course. Because even if it’s the case that fifty-something percent or whatever thought Brexit would benefit them, you only needed a few percent of the others to swing the vote, given how close it was. To reiterate the point I made some time ago - about your claim that some people 'might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it'. There is good polling evidence from before the 2016 referendum that very very few of those voting Leave expected adverse consequences for themselves or for the UK. Per the figures below from YouGov with fieldwork on 20-22 June 2016, just 3% of those intending to vote Leave thought that leaving the EU would make them worse off, while the overwhelming majority thought it would make them better, or make no difference. And to take a few other figures from the same poll, just 4% of Leavers thought it would make Britain worse (v 48% of them who thought it would make the country better off), and 2% of them thought it would be 'Bad for Jobs' (v 44% 'Good for Jobs'). So the polling numbers among those who voted Leave show that only a tiny minority expected adverse consequences. d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/atmwrgevvj/TimesResults_160622_EVEOFPOLL.pdf |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,638
|
Post by steve on Nov 28, 2022 14:44:19 GMT
Labour are now apparently outflanking the Tories on brexit & immigration and are being given credit by Nigel Farage who said "Starmer is now repeating the UKIP 2015 manifesto"
Now I'm no longer a Labour party member and I've seen the convoluted rings people who are put themselves through to defend the apparently indefensible.
But frankly whatever the realpolitik behind this and whatever focus group suggests regarding targeting the hard of thinking red wall brexiters.
This is not something to be proud of.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on Nov 28, 2022 14:44:24 GMT
SJ, ''No doubt it's an innocent mistake and not the data variant of manipulating quotes. But... The actual R&W figure for Lab was 14%, not 19%.'' The 19% figure is after DKs removed and LTV filters added, 14% from the raw data. Trevs 'error' was including it in the same list as the DKs as to be consistent the Tory retention is 68% when the sample size is lower by removing those DKs. redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/GB-Voting-Intention-20.11.2022.xlsx |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 14:53:17 GMT
JimJam: "Trevs 'error' was including it in the same list as the DKs as to be consistent the Tory retention is 68% when the sample size is lower by removing those DKs."
You seem to be saying that mixing figures from two different data sets - one raw data and the other with DKs removed - is no big deal. I beg to differ.
Either TW doesn't know how to present data in a non-misleading fashion, or he does and fails to do so, for whatever reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Nov 28, 2022 14:55:21 GMT
We've just been invited to take part in Peak Save. I reckon with that, Winter Fuel payments, money back from the government, the new boiler we got last year, turning the thermostat down and a mild winter we'll be quids in - enough for a holiday somewhere hot in February at least  . |
|
domjg
Member
Posts: 5,123
|
Post by domjg on Nov 28, 2022 14:58:37 GMT
Haha, being able to cite polling, is not the same as properly being able to explain it. Nothing James posted proves that the gain is mostly due to Starmer, as opposed to Tory implosion. It’s like the time a while back, when I suggested that some might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it, and this might have been enough to swing to Brexit. James E tried countering that by saying that actually, polling showed a majority thought Brexit would benefit them. robbiealive was quite taken with the idea this repudiated my point, but it didn’t of course. Because even if it’s the case that fifty-something percent or whatever thought Brexit would benefit them, you only needed a few percent of the others to swing the vote, given how close it was. To reiterate the point I made some time ago - about your claim that some people 'might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it'. There is good polling evidence from before the 2016 referendum that very very few of those voting Leave expected adverse consequences for themselves or for the UK. Per the figures below from YouGov with fieldwork on 20-22 June 2016, just 3% of those intending to vote Leave thought that leaving the EU would make them worse off, while the overwhelming majority thought it would make them better, or make no difference. And to take a few other figures from the same poll, just 4% of Leavers thought it would make Britain worse (v 48% of them who thought it would make the country better off), and 2% of them thought it would be 'Bad for Jobs' (v 44% 'Good for Jobs'). So the polling numbers among those who voted Leave show that only a tiny minority expected adverse consequences. d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/atmwrgevvj/TimesResults_160622_EVEOFPOLL.pdf"Haha, being able to cite polling, is not the same as properly being able to explain it." - Honestly, that guy is such a tool.. Just, unnecessarily unpleasant. |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Nov 28, 2022 15:00:06 GMT
EDIT Removed a stray comma .. Thanks ladyvalerie, much appreciated. Constant vigilance is the key. |
|
|
|
Post by jimjam on Nov 28, 2022 15:04:06 GMT
SJ, I am not suggesting anything other than saying where the 19% figure comes from for Tory 2019 - Labour.
Personally, I think the 14% figure is more accurate as that is the part that has moved to Labour or perhaps the 16% figure which has LTV filters applied.
How DKs will split is for speculation except in the case of Kantar and Opinium who know best!
14% of Tory VI switching to Labour more or less closes the gap to level pegging but Labour 2019 - Tory gives the Tories a slight lead.
Labour get their big lead from Tory DKs, churn through the LDs and first-time voters and some higher LTV.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 15:06:19 GMT
SJ, ''No doubt it's an innocent mistake and not the data variant of manipulating quotes. But... The actual R&W figure for Lab was 14%, not 19%.'' The 19% figure is after DKs removed and LTV filters added, 14% from the raw data. Trevs 'error' was including it in the same list as the DKs as to be consistent the Tory retention is 68% when the sample size is lower by removing those DKs. redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/GB-Voting-Intention-20.11.2022.xlsxAh, looks like I made a typo 'error'. Should have been 14% from the raw data. Apologies in copying over the wrong number from a spreadsheet. Doesn't really change any of the commentary though. LAB are getting a shed load more votes from CON'19 than LAB are loosing to DK+WNV (ie despite a few LAB'19 folks on UKPR2a saying they might not vote NewLABv2 then that is a tiny % in the Real World, much smaller than CON'19 DK+WNV and insignificant to the net flow of GE'19 voters moving from CON'19 to LAB VI) The discussion then moved on to whether that was all/mostly to do with CON 'brand damage' rather than much/anything that Sir Keir was doing to win over voters. Perhaps it is mostly CON 'brand damage' (ie CON 'pushed' GE'19 voters away by their own incompetence) but a few things Sir Keir has done to make LAB electable to the masses once again (ie Sir Keir 'pulling' GE'19 voters to vote for LAB) Hard to prove of course as you'll get confirmation bias issues. Quite likely a bit of both (ie CON have 'pushed' voters away and with LAB under NewLAB management then some 'pull' back to voting LAB - notably in the 'battle zone' areas outside of N1 London and other ultra safe LAB areas) Anyway, I doubt Sir Keir will lose much sleep over a few Far-Left or Arch-Rejoin folks saying they might not be voting for LAB in GE'24 when he's 20%ish ahead in the polls and 'locking in' CON'19 voters where he needs to win seats (and looking extremely likely that he will win shed loads of CON'19 seats) |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,710
Member is Online
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Nov 28, 2022 15:07:23 GMT
Haha, being able to cite polling, is not the same as properly being able to explain it. Nothing James posted proves that the gain is mostly due to Starmer, as opposed to Tory implosion. It’s like the time a while back, when I suggested that some might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it, and this might have been enough to swing to Brexit. James E tried countering that by saying that actually, polling showed a majority thought Brexit would benefit them. robbiealive was quite taken with the idea this repudiated my point, but it didn’t of course. Because even if it’s the case that fifty-something percent or whatever thought Brexit would benefit them, you only needed a few percent of the others to swing the vote, given how close it was. To reiterate the point I made some time ago - about your claim that some people 'might have voted for Brexit despite knowing they might take a hit for it'. There is good polling evidence from before the 2016 referendum that very very few of those voting Leave expected adverse consequences for themselves or for the UK. Per the figures below from YouGov with fieldwork on 20-22 June 2016, just 3% of those intending to vote Leave thought that leaving the EU would make them worse off, while the overwhelming majority thought it would make them better, or make no difference. Which when you take potential error into account and that leave only won by 4% hardly disproves the point, esp. when you take into account that the question only asks if they would be FINANCIALLY worse off, when they might consider they might be worse off in other ways. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Nov 28, 2022 15:16:44 GMT
We've just been invited to take part in Peak Save. I reckon with that, Winter Fuel payments, money back from the government, the new boiler we got last year, turning the thermostat down and a mild winter we'll be quids in - enough for a holiday somewhere hot in February at least . |
|
|
|
Post by ptarmigan on Nov 28, 2022 15:31:29 GMT
ptarmigan - "For instance, Blair era Labour had some quite authoritarian tendencies when it came to crime and immigration." Christ almighty! You have a choice. It's either Labour, or Suella Braverman at the Home Office. Do you actually understand the world we're living in? What sort of a bar is "better than Suella Braverman"? Sometimes it just feels pointless engaging on here. |
|
|
|
Post by johntel on Nov 28, 2022 15:38:11 GMT
A weekend in Saltcoats might be your limit for a February break. Well the beach looks nice. What the nightlife like? Are the natives friendly? |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 15:42:24 GMT
Lexiteer: "
Ah, looks like I made a typo 'error'. Should have been 14% from the raw data. Apologies in copying over the wrong number from a spreadsheet.
Hah. The 'innocent error' defence.
All the figures except one in TW's post came from one data field: R&W's (Overall Sample, Does Not Incorporate Likelihood to Vote)
The one exception, GE19 Con to current Lab, came from the entirely separate, next but one field: (Incorporates Likelihood to Vote, Excludes Don't Knows)
Fat finger syndrome? Highly, highly selective if so.
Alternatively, as I suggested, it comes from adding LD, Green and other from the raw data field, to the Lab tally.
So either it's manipulation or incompetence.
(I'm not pursuing a vendetta here: rather, highlighting evidence suggesting that board members should be on their guard with regard to any quotes or figures presented by TW. Whether the errors are due to carelessness, ignorance of academic standards or misrepresentation is not the point).
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 15:45:19 GMT
ptarmigan - "For instance, Blair era Labour had some quite authoritarian tendencies when it came to crime and immigration." Christ almighty! You have a choice. It's either Labour, or Suella Braverman at the Home Office. Do you actually understand the world we're living in? What sort of a bar is "better than Suella Braverman"? Sometimes it just feels pointless engaging on here. Is Yvette Cooper that much different to Braverman anyway? Here is Cooper demanding stronger action against smuggler/trafficking gangs. I assume in your original message you are referring to David Blunkett. One of the better NewLABv1 folks IMO, but I'm aware we'll disagree on that. There is of course a lot of other policies that might decide a vote and I note that 'Immigration' is considered a much more important issue for CON than LAB in polling x-breaks. Possibly why Cooper is looking to outflank Braverman by demanding for stronger action as she knows that will win votes where LAB need to win seats. 'The only way to beat the Tories is to become the Tories'However, don't let a troll like Alec put you off stating your opinion - we're all entitled to an opinion, even if the trolls don't like it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 16:01:54 GMT
Integration normally just happens, Well I don't think that is even true in historic terms. My impression is that the record suggests a fate as Conqueror or Conquered with minority ethnic groups more often in poverty stricken economic and social segregation. In today's European Societies where such a fate is-or should be- unacceptable , the host nation has to work very hard to avoid economic and social segregation. Education ( speaking the language) , housing and employment are the keys to integration of large numbers of ethnic minorities. Failure to put this work in and spend money on it results in the disastrous ethnic enclaves, violence and crime we have seen in Sweden and Denmark. Or the hordes of itinerant undocumented migrants we see in Greece and Italy. The hopeless naivety of people who share your opinion will not stop you mounting your moral soap boxes to complain about Nazis , when far right politicians step in with a different option. Borders have to be controlled. Economic migration has to match labour market needs. And Refugee intakes have to be positively integrated into society and economy-by the Government |
|
|
|
Post by moby on Nov 28, 2022 16:05:23 GMT
Look oldnat what Starmer has to deal with, many of them within his own party. I suppose your SNP membership are more like the kids in The Midwich Cuckoos in comparison. I assume you vote SNP, perhaps I'm wrong, if so apologies. |
|
|
|
Post by crossbat11 on Nov 28, 2022 16:11:17 GMT
I'm standing down my Lionel Messi avatar after just one day. He may return, depending on how the World Cup develops, and he has a better chance of doing so than Harry Kane does, but I have a new hero for now. The Cameroon Manager, Rigobert Song. I remember him vaguely from his playing days at Liverpool and West Ham in the early 00s, but he's the coolest football manager on the planet, isn't he? He presided over the 3-3 thriller between Cameroon and Serbia this afternoon rather like someone benignly overseeing a game of beach volleyball between hotel residents. The dreadlocks, blazer and baseball cap may disguise an astute football coach, but the imagery is wonderful. Beside him, the Serbian Manager was a picture of torment and rage. Rigobert, in contrast, as cool as a cucumber. His conversations with the fourth official near the team dugouts resembled those you might see in a bar near closing time. Any chance of one for the road, old boy?
Rigobert, your my sort of football man and good luck to the Lions of Africa for the rest of this increasingly beguiling tournament in Qatar.
|
|
|
|
Post by moby on Nov 28, 2022 16:13:11 GMT
Look oldnat what Starmer has to deal with, many of them within his own party. I suppose your SNP membership are more like the kids in The Midwich Cuckoos in comparison. Would you have said the same thing to Michael Foot , Tony Benn, Barbara Castle, Peter Shore, Judith Hart & John Silkin in 1975 - and again at the 1983 election? Exactly ....Starmer has the hardest job in politics. A new Labour Govmt simply won't have the bandwidth to both deal with the mess left to them by the tories and re-enter negotiations to re-join the EU. It's just not realistic. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 16:14:10 GMT
R&W's competency tracker (update due in a few hours). They helpfully show various key events. Rishi+Hunt have clawed 'competency' rating back from the Truss era error low point but not sure they can take it much further than that given the 'brand damage' and the ongoing issues of 'small boats', CoL, factional infighting, etc How depressing to be pleased about this. ! |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Nov 28, 2022 16:15:00 GMT
I suspect your lack of knowledge about other political parties, is only matched by your fevered imagination. I assume you vote SNP, perhaps I'm wrong, if so apologies. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2022 16:22:50 GMT
(I'm not pursuing a vendetta here: rather, highlighting evidence suggesting that board members should be on their guard with regard to any quotes or figures presented by TW. Whether the errors are due to carelessness, ignorance of academic standards or misrepresentation is not the point). Of course you are. Give it a rest -for crying out loud. You have alerted " board members" from your self appointed position. Since they are all adults and interested in polling, why on earth do you think they can't decide for themselves about the "errors" of other posters ? |
|
|
|
Post by ladyvalerie on Nov 28, 2022 16:27:38 GMT
Labour are now apparently outflanking the Tories on brexit & immigration and are being given credit by Nigel Farage who said "Starmer is now repeating the UKIP 2015 manifesto" Now I'm no longer a Labour party member and I've seen the convoluted rings people who are put themselves through to defend the apparently indefensible. But frankly whatever the realpolitik behind this and whatever focus group suggests regarding targeting the hard of thinking red wall brexiters. This is not something to be proud of. Steve I’ve voted Labour since 1974. I rejoined to vote for Starmer who I like and trust. I’ve been visiting UKPR1/2 since 2009, sometimes as the only self-identifying female, because I’m interested in polling. I’m not an evangelist. I don’t seek to change another’s voting habits or hector them about the choices they make. You don’t like Starmer - fine. Then don’t vote Labour. |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 16:29:57 GMT
Colin: "why on earth do you think they can't decide for themselves about the "errors" of other posters ?"
Because no-one would have noticed this if I hadn't smelt a rat and highlighted the "error". Having highlighted the issue, I did indeed leave others to "decide for themselves about the "errors" of other posters "
Or are you claiming that you had noticed the 'error" and decided for yourself that it didn't matter?
Look, it's fine for you to consistently like TW's posts and defend him here, as you seem to feel he's a fellow member of an embattled minority. But I'm surprised and disappointed that that defence extends to his manufacturing of quotes and mishandling of data. Aren't standards of truthfulness independent of political allegiance?
|
|
|
|
Post by alec on Nov 28, 2022 16:30:04 GMT
ptarmigan - "Sometimes it just feels pointless engaging on here." Apologies - my post was a little harsh, but wasn't intended to be so. I understand your frustration. I find 'triangulation' unedifying and the practice of taking your core for granted depressing. But the reality is that under FPTP, people like us vote Labour or vote Tory, in any practical sense. I just don't see that we have any real choice at present.
|
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Nov 28, 2022 16:32:42 GMT
(I'm not pursuing a vendetta here: rather, highlighting evidence suggesting that board members should be on their guard with regard to any quotes or figures presented by TW. Whether the errors are due to carelessness, ignorance of academic standards or misrepresentation is not the point). Of course you are. Give it a rest -for crying out loud. You have alerted " board members" from your self appointed position. Since they are all adults and interested in polling, why on earth do you think they can't decide for themselves about the "errors" of other posters ? Leave the trolls to their trolling IMO. It's a free country and they are easy to just ignore.  I do love the irony though. Of course people should always check sources, check numbers, etc. (always great if people state the source to make that process easier). Quite hilarious that SJ makes a fuss about sources after the faux outrage of the alleged "falsification" nonsense the other day, when I merely highlighted the source of one of the other 'usual suspects' with a petty personal vendetta from UKPR days. Anyway, leave them to it. If the trolls wish to spend their day trolling then that is their choice. |
|
|
|
Post by alec on Nov 28, 2022 16:36:42 GMT
Good to see this discussion in the mainstream press, albeit in the US - For those interested, this is the NYT article - www.nytimes.com/2022/11/28/opinion/winter-rsv-covid-flu.html?smid=tw-shareWe've actually learned an awful lot about how we can stop respiratory viruses because of the covid pandemic, and as the second tweet in the thread says, some people are keen to go straight back to the pre 2019 days when lots of people got sick with 'flu and RSV every winter, while others are saying that with a few simple steps we could all be so much healthier and better off, as well as ridding ourselves of covid. |
|
|
|
Post by somerjohn on Nov 28, 2022 16:41:59 GMT
Lexiteer: "I merely highlighted the source of one of the other 'usual suspects' with a petty personal vendetta from UKPR days."
No. You falsified a quote.
I wonder if you understand that a quote is a verbatim (ie word for word) repeat of what someone has said or written.
If you change those words to something substantially different, that is misrepresentation.
Your attempt to pass this off as "trolling" does you no credit.
|
|
.
