cogload
Lib Dem
I jumped in the river and what did I see...
Posts: 8,252
|
Post by cogload on May 17, 2017 19:14:04 GMT
Either that or the Tories have sailed to 55%.
|
|
Sibboleth
Labour
'Sit on my finger, sing in my ear, O littleblood.'
Posts: 15,365
|
Post by Sibboleth on May 17, 2017 20:29:20 GMT
Ben Page is hyping on Twitter I see. How entirely out of character.
|
|
Tom
Unionist
Posts: 1,998
|
Post by Tom on May 18, 2017 10:24:52 GMT
It's indisputable Labour has gained ground over this campaign and the Lib Dems have had a mare. I'd still be very surprised if Labour poll over 30%.
|
|
|
Post by chrisscot1988 on May 18, 2017 10:28:42 GMT
I don't think the Tories will be unhappy about Labour closing in 3 weeks out. Although it remains incredibly far fetched, they need there to be some sense of 'fear' that Corbyn could win it, to ensure people don't vote feel it is safe to keep voting Labour on basis "Tories are guaranteed a victory".
I mean the poll lead is still huge, but if this story is spun as focusing on 'Corbyn closes the gap', it's likely to make more people go 'oh god, I really had better vote Tory then', than would be the case if they were further ahead.
Important with postal votes coming out next week too.
Plus, was there not some evidence that Labour's vote was increasing in the 'wrong' places i.e. seats where they don't really need it to go up? Whereas the Tories were basically unchanged in their heartlands but putting on votes in their target areas? So the increase in vote share for Labour here might not actually translate to lots of additional seats?
|
|
Izzyeviel
Lib Dem
I stayed up for Hartlepools
Posts: 3,279
|
Post by Izzyeviel on May 18, 2017 11:07:34 GMT
yay.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,804
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on May 18, 2017 11:30:06 GMT
Though that Tory figure still looks a bit high......
|
|
|
Post by pepperminttea on May 18, 2017 12:02:50 GMT
Though that Tory figure still looks a bit high...... So does that Labour figure...
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,804
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on May 18, 2017 12:04:59 GMT
Though a Tory figure of 47 is being quoted in some places.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2017 15:11:38 GMT
I don't think the Tories will be unhappy about Labour closing in 3 weeks out. Although it remains incredibly far fetched, they need there to be some sense of 'fear' that Corbyn could win it, to ensure people don't vote feel it is safe to keep voting Labour on basis "Tories are guaranteed a victory".
I mean the poll lead is still huge, but if this story is spun as focusing on 'Corbyn closes the gap', it's likely to make more people go 'oh god, I really had better vote Tory then', than would be the case if they were further ahead.
Important with postal votes coming out next week too.
Plus, was there not some evidence that Labour's vote was increasing in the 'wrong' places i.e. seats where they don't really need it to go up? Whereas the Tories were basically unchanged in their heartlands but putting on votes in their target areas? So the increase in vote share for Labour here might not actually translate to lots of additional seats? There is no reliable evidence about this and given the paucity/unreliability of constituency polling, probably won't be before 10pm on 8 June. What I would say is that the significance of variations from the mean in terms of vote distribution can be overstated. A 15 point lead will result in lots of additional seats saved over and above the previous IM figure, even if distribution means they incur additional losses beyond a UNS type projection. Distribution is only ever going to account for a small number of losses and gains.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2017 16:36:08 GMT
To put this into context, that's a combined Con + Lab score of 83%, which we haven't seen the likes of in a general election since 1970. Lib Dems registering below their 2015 score. Is this believable?
I don't believe we've seen UKIP on 2% since the 2005-2010 Parliament. Perhaps this is a reflection on the reduction of their number of candidates.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2017 16:54:02 GMT
To put this into context, that's a combined Con + Lab score of 83%, which we haven't seen the likes of in a general election since 1970. Lib Dems registering below their 2015 score. Is this believable? I don't believe we've seen UKIP on 2% since the 2005-2010 Parliament. Perhaps this is a reflection on the reduction of their number of candidates.I don't think pollsters normally control for that, do they?
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,804
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on May 18, 2017 17:26:20 GMT
To put this into context, that's a combined Con + Lab score of 83%, which we haven't seen the likes of in a general election since 1970. Lib Dems registering below their 2015 score. Is this believable? I don't believe we've seen UKIP on 2% since the 2005-2010 Parliament. Perhaps this is a reflection on the reduction of their number of candidates. There may have been a few circa 2010-11 with YouGov (and possibly other pollsters) Even though they are on just 3% themselves, the Greens are ahead of UKIP in this survey - when was the last time *that* happened?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2017 17:55:27 GMT
I've always thought that any party that gets 1% or more in a VI poll after rounding ought to get a specific mention. That includes the Greens and SNP/Plaid.
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on May 18, 2017 19:08:57 GMT
It's indisputable Labour has gained ground over this campaign and the Lib Dems have had a mare. I'd still be very surprised if Labour poll over 30%. That suggests that the contest is being seen increasingly as a pivotal gut Red or Blue moment with all the minors being squeezed down as inconsequential fluff to this one contest? I don't fully buy that, but it could be true with the LDs suffering everywhere except where they have local success and a perceived chance of winning. that could actually mask an untick for LDs in a series of seats as well as a general downturn? But a slashing like that looks false. So does the Labour uptick. Why? What caused it? I never believe the manifesto publication has any effect on most of the public except over time and drip feed from the press.
|
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,166
|
Post by Jack on May 18, 2017 19:19:44 GMT
Not sure why this poll was being hyped, seeing as it just reiterates the current trend.
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on May 18, 2017 19:27:00 GMT
Not sure why this poll was being hyped, seeing as it just reiterates the current trend. Not really. It looks like an outlier to me, with Labour rather higher and the Liberals a little lower. As always it needs other polls to confirm. The interesting thing at this election is that different polling companies are making different adjustments, and this should lead to a greater spread in results. It will be fascinating to see who gets it right. I'm not betting on Ipsos-Mori.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2017 19:44:36 GMT
An average of all polls over the past seven days gives us Con 47, Lab 31, LD 8, UKIP 5, Greens 3, SNP/Plaid 4.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2017 20:42:47 GMT
An average of all polls over the past seven days gives us Con 47, Lab 31, LD 8, UKIP 5, Greens 3, SNP/Plaid 4. I actually feel for the Lib Dems at times, do feel like no recovery at all is quite harsh. Farron will probably have to go if that ends up being the result. Always thought Lamb was the stronger choice. Universally respected and no marmitey.
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on May 18, 2017 20:56:24 GMT
I still think they'll be nearer 10%. For a start you've got to take at least 1% off UKIP and Greens just to account for the seats they aren't contesting and Labour are likely to be just below 30% while the Tories surely can't go much above 47&, I hope I'm wrong actually. I'd love to see them getting a lower share and fewer seats than last time but I don't see it (i'd be happy for them to get fewer than 10 seats at least as I;d make some money on it)
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on May 18, 2017 22:35:14 GMT
I think the LDs will get at least 12% and if they dont I'll eat my (marzipan) hat
|
|