|
Post by andrew111 on Aug 8, 2019 13:58:32 GMT
#SwinsonSurge ?? #BreconBounce ??
Steady as she goes. All within margin of error
|
|
|
Post by LDCaerdydd on Aug 8, 2019 15:03:17 GMT
After the last nine years I'll take 22% 21%, margin of error or no margin of error.
|
|
|
YouGov
Aug 8, 2019 15:16:31 GMT
Post by justin124 on Aug 8, 2019 15:16:31 GMT
After the last nine years I'll take 22%, margin of error or no margin of error. LDs are on 21%.
|
|
|
YouGov
Aug 8, 2019 15:17:28 GMT
Post by LDCaerdydd on Aug 8, 2019 15:17:28 GMT
I'll still take it!
|
|
|
YouGov
Aug 8, 2019 16:47:00 GMT
via mobile
jamie likes this
Post by afleitch on Aug 8, 2019 16:47:00 GMT
There's been a surprising lack of polls since the by-election. So any actual 'bounce' has probably diminished a bit.
|
|
|
Post by woollyliberal on Aug 8, 2019 17:36:44 GMT
After the last nine years I'll take 22%, margin of error or no margin of error. LDs are on 21%. LDs are on 20% with YouGov and have been since the Euros. All this 19% some weeks and 21% in others is just sampling noise. Holding steady at 20% is quite something.
|
|
|
YouGov
Aug 8, 2019 17:55:59 GMT
via mobile
Post by andrew111 on Aug 8, 2019 17:55:59 GMT
After the last nine years I'll take 22% 21%, margin of error or no margin of error. Yes, 21% is certainly not within MOE of 8%... I said after the Euros that we were probably back to pre-2010 normal service.. People actually voting all over the country in a national election makes a lot more difference than a by-election.
|
|
|
YouGov
Aug 9, 2019 15:56:31 GMT
Post by tonygreaves on Aug 9, 2019 15:56:31 GMT
It's interesting that in 1982 and in 1983 well into the election campaign, when it was the Liberal/SDP Alliance, those parties were really upset at being stuck on about 20% in the polls. The truth of course is that 20% now will get us more seats that 20% then (or indeed 25% at the 83 election itself). Perhaps quite a lot more.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Aug 9, 2019 16:25:45 GMT
It's interesting that in 1982 and in 1983 well into the election campaign, when it was the Liberal/SDP Alliance, those parties were really upset at being stuck on about 20% in the polls. The truth of course is that 20% now will get us more seats that 20% then (or indeed 25% at the 83 election itself). Perhaps quite a lot more. Careful there. During the 1983 election campaign the Alliance poll rating started in the low 20s but suddenly surged in the middle of the campaign and ended at 26%. As a result when the Alliance went into the 1987 election in the mid-20s, a lot of the party (and media) went through it expecting there would be "a surge" taking their poll rating up to the sort of levels where they would win lots of seats. It never happened; instead they sank back down to 23%. Spitting Image had a great deal of fun with their David Steel character saying "I can feel the surge".
|
|
|
YouGov
Aug 9, 2019 19:45:16 GMT
Post by finsobruce on Aug 9, 2019 19:45:16 GMT
It's interesting that in 1982 and in 1983 well into the election campaign, when it was the Liberal/SDP Alliance, those parties were really upset at being stuck on about 20% in the polls. The truth of course is that 20% now will get us more seats that 20% then (or indeed 25% at the 83 election itself). Perhaps quite a lot more. Careful there. During the 1983 election campaign the Alliance poll rating started in the low 20s but suddenly surged in the middle of the campaign and ended at 26%. As a result when the Alliance went into the 1987 election in the mid-20s, a lot of the party (and media) went through it expecting there would be "a surge" taking their poll rating up to the sort of levels where they would win lots of seats. It never happened; instead they sank back down to 23%. Spitting Image had a great deal of fun with their David Steel character saying "I can feel the surge".Close enough....
|
|
|
YouGov
Aug 9, 2019 21:59:55 GMT
Post by tonygreaves on Aug 9, 2019 21:59:55 GMT
It's interesting that in 1982 and in 1983 well into the election campaign, when it was the Liberal/SDP Alliance, those parties were really upset at being stuck on about 20% in the polls. The truth of course is that 20% now will get us more seats that 20% then (or indeed 25% at the 83 election itself). Perhaps quite a lot more. Careful there. During the 1983 election campaign the Alliance poll rating started in the low 20s but suddenly surged in the middle of the campaign and ended at 26%. As a result when the Alliance went into the 1987 election in the mid-20s, a lot of the party (and media) went through it expecting there would be "a surge" taking their poll rating up to the sort of levels where they would win lots of seats. It never happened; instead they sank back down to 23%. Spitting Image had a great deal of fun with their David Steel character saying "I can feel the surge". We are not in disagreement. My point is that we now feel 20% is slightly wonderful. In 1982/83 were thought it was worrying.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
YouGov
Aug 11, 2019 7:15:07 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 7:15:07 GMT
|
|
|
YouGov
Aug 11, 2019 11:37:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by andrew111 on Aug 11, 2019 11:37:27 GMT
I would like to see what the other seats are that are not mentioned and which the Tories would hold...
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,895
Member is Online
|
YouGov
Aug 11, 2019 12:09:52 GMT
Post by jamie on Aug 11, 2019 12:09:52 GMT
They name some constituencies that are "at risk" "could fall" but don't actually specific whether the Lib Dems are polling ahead/behind in a single constituency. Its not because they are behind everywhere, we all know the Lib Dems will be polling ahead in Richmond Park but it doesn't even give a single constituency specific data point anywhere in the article.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
YouGov
Aug 11, 2019 12:25:20 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 12:25:20 GMT
I would like to see what the other seats are that are not mentioned and which the Tories would hold... all the seats they mention are in the top 10 tory target lib dem seats. The missing two are Wells and Southport
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Aug 11, 2019 22:16:46 GMT
Given that, even allowing for management expectation, everyone expects the Lib Dems to win at least 20 seats at the next election. Further given that at least 10 of them will be Tory seats (given the marginality of Con/LD vs Lab/LD seats), it can hardly be said to be newsworthy that the Tories could lose 10 seats to the Lib Dems at a forthcoming election!?!
|
|
|
YouGov
Aug 12, 2019 6:43:10 GMT
Post by andrewp on Aug 12, 2019 6:43:10 GMT
I would like to see what the other seats are that are not mentioned and which the Tories would hold... all the seats they mention are in the top 10 tory target lib dem seats. The missing two are Wells and Southport This was in the Sunday times as well. Under the particularly clumsy headline of ‘ Tories would lose half of marginal seats to Lib Dems’. It claims a straight 8% swing from con to Lib Dem. Says that Richmond Park, St Ives, Cheltenham, North Devon, Cheadle, Lewis, St Albans, Hazel Grove, Wells and North Cornwall would be lost
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
YouGov
Aug 12, 2019 6:58:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2019 6:58:34 GMT
all the seats they mention are in the top 10 tory target lib dem seats. The missing two are Wells and Southport This was in the Sunday times as well. Under the particularly clumsy headline of ‘ Tories would lose half of marginal seats to Lib Dems’. It claims a straight 8% swing from con to Lib Dem. Says that Richmond Park, St Ives, Cheltenham, North Devon, Cheadle, Lewis, St Albans, Hazel Grove, Wells and North Cornwall would be lost yes i read that article. The headline was rather misleading. 8% swing sounds right too as 11 tory held seats require less than 8% and Hazel Grove is the last with 7% swing. The next is Winchester with an 8% swing
|
|
|
Post by London Lad on Aug 13, 2019 14:05:58 GMT
Seems to be a rather large disconnect here...
|
|
|
Post by Strontium Dog on Aug 13, 2019 14:29:52 GMT
As they say, the strongest argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.
|
|