|
|
Post by James E on Jan 10, 2022 13:57:11 GMT
Trevor, of course some Tory DK/WNV could be one time Tory voters ot sure who to vote for next time if at all. 100% returning home for either party is unlikely but I agree with the notion that it is probably a little closer then current headline VI in reality. [ 13 sets of inverted commas and a Game of Thrones slogan ] Have to agree with Jim Jam that it is fanciful to imagine all of the DKs reverting to the party they voted for last time. In the case of YouGov's poll today, a 50% reversion (the old ICM adjustent) would boost the Tories by a net 2 points - which is less than the same adjustment to their December polls. But surely there is little to no case for treating those who say their Will Not Vote as possible returners? People notoriously overstate their likelyhood to vote rather than understating it. And YouGov's figures continue to show significantly more Leave than Remain voters stating that they will not vote - by 12% to 4% in the latest poll, which is fairly typical. We already know that the numbers of living 2016 Remainers and Leavers will be even in 3 years time. If the pattern shown by this and other recent YouGovs holds, then we'd have significantly more 2016 Remainers then Leavers casting their vote (by about 52% to 48%) in 2024. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 10, 2022 13:34:20 GMT
Superb  |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 8, 2022 21:46:04 GMT
@jimjam
For those who express a voting intention (so excl DontKnows) it's 9% of Cons to Lab, and 1% the other way.
I make that 3.7% of direct swing [(45% x 0.09) - (33% x 0.01) ]
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 8, 2022 20:05:31 GMT
Today's Opinium
LAB: 39% (-)
CON: 34% (+2)
LDEM: 11% (-)
GRN: 5% (-1)
via
@opiniumresearch
, 05 - 07 Jan
Chgs. w/ Dec
(Opinium tend to show better results for Labour than other pollsters, and showed the largest Labour lead (9 pts) of any pollster in early December. So a slight reversion after the larger leads we saw last month.)
Keir Starmer’s approval rating is almost unchanged on a fortnight ago.
Approve 34% (-1)
Disapprove 31% (-)
Net score +3
Boris Johnson’s approval rating has recovered over the past fortnight, although it is still lower than where it was in November.
Approve 30% (+6)
Disapprove 54% (-1)
Net score -24
Changes on 21-23 December
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 8, 2022 19:39:48 GMT
The secret barrister's conclusion is particularly interesting. " 10. Does this create a precedent? Does it mean that anybody can now pull down a statute of somebody they don’t like without consequence? No. And no. Jury verdicts create no precedent in law. If a case with exactly the same facts were tried tomorrow by a different jury, that jury would be entitled to convict. If you pull down a statue, and the Crown Prosecution Service conclude that there is evidence to support a charge of criminal damage and that it is in the public interest to prosecute you, you will be prosecuted for criminal damage. You will then be at liberty to plead not guilty and to be tried by a jury of your peers, during which you would be tried according to the same standards and under the same law as the Colston 4. Whether you would be convicted, and, if so, what your sentence would be, would entirely depend on the facts and circumstances proved by the evidence. There is never a guaranteed outcome with a jury trial. " thesecretbarrister.com/2022/01/06/do-the-verdicts-in-the-trial-of-the-colston-4-signal-something-wrong-with-our-jury-system-10-things-you-should-know/ |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 8, 2022 18:29:55 GMT
Tancred
"Why can the verdict not be appealed? Any reason?"
The Attorney General's words, which I've quoted to you above, are repeated in every news source I have read on this story. These make it clear that any appeal she may make does not alter the verdict.
I am not a legal expert, but she is meant to be.
[Edit 19:00hrs - @ Lululemon, below. Yes, it does sound like double jeopardy]
[Edit 19:10hrs - thanks to Barbara (again below) for referring us to the Secret Barrister article. I knew I'd read this point somewhere yesterday, but could not remember when. It seems that Braverman agrees with him]
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 8, 2022 15:15:32 GMT
Looking forward to the first Opinium of 2022, which should be released at 8pm this evening, if it follows their normal pattern.
My guess would be a somewhat lower Labour lead than their 39/32 two weeks ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 6, 2022 21:53:41 GMT
@jimjam This is how our former host explained the ICM 'Don't Knows' adjustment. As I read it, they did apply it to the LDs, because otherwise his 4th paragraph would not make sense. Other pollsters applied a lower rate of 30% to the LD 'Don't Knows', and it seems that it was not applied to other parties. ukpollingreport.co.uk/faq-dont-knowsAW wrote this some time around 2005-09, which is why he explains how the ICM adjustment may 'now' be boosting the Labour VI. The final paragraph of the linked article may be of interest to to a separate question that people have occasionally asked here and on the old site - why do YouGov tend to give the largest leads for whichever party is ahead. It may be that AW's old account for this still applies. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 6, 2022 18:01:46 GMT
[Gobbledegook, with a tweet from R&W] This is dire news for Labour. My guess is many 'don't knows' are closet Tories temporarily in a huff with Boris. They will come back to the fold. I don't think your reading of this makes sense, Tancred. It shows that among those currently saying that they 'Don't know' how they will vote (who are normally something in the region of 15-20% of the total) slightly more say they might vote Tory than that they might vote Labour (by 22% to 17%). By my maths, this means that the 'Don't Knows' would boost the Tories by about 1 point. So hardly 'dire': in fact, it is less than the "ICM adjustment*" that I have occasionally calculated from each party's 'DontKnows' from their GE2019 voters. This is generally around 2 points for the Tories. *ICM used to re-allocate half of the 'Don't Knows' from each party's voters at the previous election back to the party they voted for last time. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 4, 2022 20:26:28 GMT
Sorry, I don't agree. Starmer has led in 'Best Prime Minister' polls at regular intervals during his 21 months as Labour leader, something that Milliband in 5 years and Corbyn in 4 years did not manage in any poll . And Starmer's personal leads (e.g. 10 % with YG, Nov 2020, and 13% Mori, Dec 2021) have been larger than Labour's polling leads at those times. [to give another example: the most recent youGov shows a 6-point lead for labour. But Starmer's personal lead as 'Best PM' over Johnson is 12 points] docs.cdn.yougov.com/7za8e4puku/TheTimes_VI_211220_W.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 4, 2022 19:48:28 GMT
I see that Starmer is very supportive of Blair getting his knighthood at least on Sky News anyway ,how do you LoC supporters feel about that. Does Starmer see himself as a Blair clone I wonder. Indifferent No |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 4, 2022 16:40:33 GMT
WoW-the confidence levels of Labour supporters in their new Leader is pretty underwhelming if UKPR2 is anything to go by> How about a survey Labour Galls & Guys? Do you think Kier Starmer can win the next GE? ( "can" because it allows you to contemplate any Con Leader -and keeps the question simple.) Yes And I disagree with the notion that his poll ratings are poor. He's overtaken Johnson in most 'Best Prime Minister' polling, and is (I think) now seen as more trustworthy and more competent than the current PM. www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/keir-starmer-leads-boris-johnson-most-capable-pm-13-points |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 3, 2022 20:41:05 GMT
While it's never wise to put too much faith in small sub-samples, that R&W does support the idea that the Tories have lost support in the 'Regions' where they progressed in 2019. Labour are shown as leading in W Midland (by 15 points), E Midlands (by 8), Yorkshire (by 27) and Wales (by 23).
So, in that respect, a similar picture to the Deltapoll released a few days ago.
[As a general point, I've noticed a lot of Midlands sub-samples that look good for Labour - for example, the most recent YouGov showed an 8 point Lab lead in 'Mids/Wales']
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 3, 2022 16:02:49 GMT
I know you've all been waiting for this following the seasonal games. Top six average scores per day 1. Tancred 13 posts 2. Danny 11 posts 3. Steve 10 posts 4. Colin 8 posts 5. Old Nat 7 posts 6. Lululemon 7 posts So at this stage in the season the top two in the automatic promotion positions are Tankers and Danners. Tucked just outside the play off places are myself, Alec and Batters. Alec's results are the subject of VAR investigation cos the list still says his last post was 12th December, which is plainly wrong, though he might have had a points deduction due to financial irregularities. Quite a contrast between the 'most posts' table and the 'most likes'. On the basis of the page of their recent posts (30 posts) our top two have received one 'like' between them. Barbara has 73. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 2, 2022 13:18:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Jan 1, 2022 22:46:55 GMT
The MoS Poll is by Deltapoll, and the overall figures are Lab 4O, Con35, LD 1O, SNP 5, Grn 4, Refuk 3. Fieldwork 23-30 dec. Tables here: deltapoll.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Deltapoll-220101_voteint.pdfEdit - Just to note, the 16 point lead appears to apply to their sample of 'seats won by Con'. the swing must be well over 10%, but their sample for this is just 612 voters. You might also query deltapoll's sampling, with the SNP taking 17% of their (GB) age 18-24 sub-sample, but 0% of the 25-49 year olds. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 31, 2021 13:57:39 GMT
@ Ladyvalerie
To put a positive spin on things, I believe that Barbara and Mandoninist have brought about at least a 200% increase in the number of women regularly contributing to UKPR (2); there may be more.
On the abortion 'debate' - I've been surprised to read some of the views expressed here, too. There are very few in the UK who would want to remove existing rights.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 30, 2021 18:57:56 GMT
crossbat11 and steve - re the @tw blocking: it's a fun little game I play, picking him up on his regular misrepresentations and falsehoods. He claims to have blocked me (which is possible, I have confirmed) but it's funny how in subsequent posts there are the tell tale signs of a tweaked response here, a roll back on a point there, a caveating of an answer or a broadening of a point that corrects an earlier falsehood. or issuing a rebuttal to a point he couldn't possibly have read, because he's blocked me, apparently.... One of the amusing aspects of life om UKPR2. The Trevors do actually admit to reading the posts that they block in a post at 16:26pm above. But I'm guessing that not many people read that one.  |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 28, 2021 20:13:44 GMT
turk I agree that Truss is a match for Starmer. But it seems the public think differently. www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/27/boris-johnson-a-drag-on-tories-and-sunak-would-do-better-poll-shows27/12/21, reporting on Opinium: "As well as Johnson, Opinium asked people how they would vote under three further scenarios: if Sunak, Liz Truss or Michael Gove led the Tories – and in each scenario assumed that Starmer remained Labour’s leader. Truss is far less popular with the wider public than with Conservative activists, the polling suggests. The latest survey of party members conducted by the Conservative Home website showed her as their favourite successor to Johnson, with Sunak second. However, Opinium’s figures suggest that she would do even worse than Johnson, and far worse than Sunak, and lead the Tories to a crushing 16-point defeat." |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 28, 2021 16:31:06 GMT
There is a new You Gov poll reported in the Guardian. It suggests 203 seats for the Conservatives under Johnson, with 60 more when Sunak is mentioned. Oh my, seems pretty clear the knives will be out soon. Not necessarily. Sunak is doing a reasonably good job as chancellor, I doubt that he would want to take on his boss at this stage. If anyone might take on Johnson it would be Truss, as she was a remainer and would presumably get the backing of the 'remaining remainers' in the Tory party as well as many brexiters. Sunak is effective, but I'm not sure that his support base is as wide as that of Truss - I suspect it isn't. It is no longer possible for another Tory MP to 'take on' or chalenge for the leadership, as they changed the rules more than 20 years ago. www.newstatesman.com/the-explainer/2021/12/how-could-conservative-mps-remove-boris-johnson-as-leaderWhat could happen is a bid to remove Johnson, as happened to Ian Duncan-Smith in 2003. Only after this happens can others stand, and (if removed) Johnson himself would not be eligible for the leadership. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 27, 2021 20:49:33 GMT
eor
I think you should understand that not all 'MRP's are the same. YouGov's involves profiling each individual constituency, which produces some very varied results. Their 2017 MRP (with polling showing a 4-point Con lead) produced similar results to their general polling (which was around a 5 point Con lead, with smaller samples). So the accurcy of their 'interesting' constituency results was not the result of an unusual sample for the MRP.
Focaldata, though, appear to have done something very odd in Scotland and Wales, which has distorted their constituency results in the poll released 48 hours ago. Their figures for Scotland show the SNP on just 37%, 8 points below any Scottish Westminster poll in 2021, despite retaining 85% of their supporters from GE2019, where they got 45% of the votes cast in Scotland. I'm hoping that at some point they will explain or correct this.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 27, 2021 10:26:28 GMT
@ Colin I think there is good reason to doubt the low vote shares that Focaldata show for the SNP and PC. To take these in turn, the 37% share for the SNP is far lower than their share in 25 Scotland Westminster polls during 2021, which have ranged between 51% and 45% support for the SNP. So this is 8 points lower than any full Scottish poll for Westminster. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#ScotlandIn Wales, the position is not quite so clear cut, but the Plaid 12% share is also below each of the 7 Wales Westminster polls in 2021, which range from 13% to 18%. So I would not believe tha 10 SNP losses to Labour, nor the 3 PC losses that Focaldata show. Apart from that, the seats figures may be bradly correct: an 8-point Lab lead would probably just about get labour to (approx) 325 seats, and the constituency figures take no account of tactical voting. This would probably deprive the Tories of some seats in England, and maybe take some off the SNP in Scotland. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 26, 2021 22:43:37 GMT
I've edited my 20:45 post above regarding Focaldata's MRP.
Focaldata's churn analysis seems to all be at GB level, resulting in Scottish and Welsh parties appearing to pick up close to zero from Con, Lab and LDs.
And their Welsh and Scottish constituency results appear to me to contain an absolutely ridiculous and basic methodological flaw, which disadvantages PC and the SNP (and boosts the total of Labour seats).
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 26, 2021 11:43:04 GMT
"26% of Leave supporters said it had gone worse than they expected, while 16% of those who voted for Brexit said they had expected it to go badly and had been proved right." The majority of those 16% who say they expected it to go badly are 'misremembering'. Looking at the polling the YouGov did in June 2016, only a tiny proportion of Leave voters expected negative consequences either for themselves or for the British economy. The contemporaneous figures were that just 3% expected it to make them worse off, 4% expected it to be bad for the economy, and 2% thought it would be bad for the NHS. The highest truly negative indicator was that 5% expected Britain to have less influence in the World. d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/atmwrgevvj/TimesResults_160622_EVEOFPOLL.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 21, 2021 16:41:44 GMT
Just a quick one to say...it appears that a band with a very rude name are heading for a top 5 entry in the charts with an even ruder song about Boris Johnson... well it’s a poll of sorts. They could do one for every political leader, see how they do. This one has a little more political balance. www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-kbMF1GF2A |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 21, 2021 0:20:30 GMT
Certainly some dreaming going on here tonight and nobody has considered whether a) the EU will still be around, or, assuming it is, b) whether they would actually invite us to rejoin!. They demanded our fishing grounds last time round, I wonder what they would want next time? Maybe they'd settle for Aston Villa? It seems blindingly obvious to most people that the EU will still be around in 5, 10 or 25 years time, whatever timescale you care to name. It is you who is dreamland, fantasising about it ceasing to exist. We heard the same 5 years ago, with predictions of the UK's leaving somehow resulting in other EU states doing the same or of the EU "collapsing" for reasons which have never been explained, and certainly have not transpired. In fact, the reality was quite the opposite: support for EU Membership (which was always high) has risen across the EU27.What the UK seems to have shown to the rest of the continent is that Leaving really isn't a good idea. europeelects.eu/eu-membership-approval/And the EU does not "invite" countries to join - they apply, and any European country is free to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 18, 2021 13:57:30 GMT
If we're debating the kind of reasoning which lead 52% of those voting to support Leave, that YouGov poll from 20-22 June 2016, now linked twice above, is a surely the right place to start.
Leavers thought that Leaving would be 'good for jobs' by 44% to 2% (with the rest saying no difference, or don't know)
Leavers thought that Leaving would be good for the NHS by 69% to 2%.
Leavers thought that Leaving would make Britain less at risk from terrorism by 39% to 1%.
Leavers thought that Leaving would give Britain more influence in the world by 33% to 5%.
Leavers thought that Leaving would make the UK better off economically by 48% to 4%.
Leavers thought that Leaving would make them personally better off by 20% to 3%.
Lots of DK's and 'it would make no difference' in some of these answers, but what is really striking is the very low level of negative consequences acknowledged at the time by those who intended to vote Leave.
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 18, 2021 13:22:27 GMT
There are potentially some additional Leaver categories. E.g. those concerned with left wing arguments regarding how trade arrangements can lead to the inequalities of globalism etc. And a category put forward by some in the media, suggesting that some, feeling badly affected by economic arrangements, and wanting to get back at those voting for those arrangements, voted leave even though they knew it might harm them too. That would be a very small category of Leavers, though. Checking back to pre-referendum polling, YouGov found that only 3% of Leavers (ie 1% of the electorate) believed that Brexit would make them worse off*. And it seems unlikely that any more of a fraction of that were "concerned with left wing arguments" given that the overwhelming majority of support for Leave was from the right. "Do you think you personally would be financially better or worse off if Britain left the European Union, or would it make no difference?" YouGov 20-22 June 2016 (see page 6 of 10) d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/atmwrgevvj/TimesResults_160622_EVEOFPOLL.pdf* 4% of Leavers also thought that Leaving would make the UK worse off. I suspect that the proportion has risen over the past 5 and a half years. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 17, 2021 19:33:23 GMT
@ Crossbat11 I did a quick check on Mrs Fangle-Farrer's village as it sounded familiar, but the village that I'd remembered was in fact called Wyre Piddle. It's in the mid Worcestershire constituency, which has a fine collection of England's silliest-named places: Fladbury, Oddingley, Throckmorton, Flyford Flavell, Pinvin, Upton Snodsbury, White Ladies Aston, as well as the aforementioned Wyre Piddle and nearby North Pidddle. These are all real places... Needless to say, it has a huge majority for the Silly Party :-) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mid_Worcestershire_(UK_Parliament_constituency) |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Dec 13, 2021 11:06:08 GMT
Newly released Ipsos Mori with feildwork spread from 3-10 Dec gives labour a 5-point lead.
|
|
