|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Dec 15, 2019 15:50:36 GMT
Each of the past four exit polls have overestimated the Lib Dems by precisely two seats. 57 in 2010 (59 in the exit poll) 8 in 2015 (10 in the exit poll) 12 in 2017 (14 in the exit poll) 11 in 2019 (13 in the exit poll) I wonder if some of that is down to it adding probabilities of seat wins. If the Lib Dems have a small chance of winning a lot of different seats, it's plausible they could take only one or two but the exit poll will project a fairly high figure. UKIP got overestimated in 2015 for similar reasons. |
|
pl
Non-Aligned
Posts: 1,682 
|
Post by pl on Dec 15, 2019 15:58:06 GMT
Each of the past four exit polls have overestimated the Lib Dems by precisely two seats. 57 in 2010 (59 in the exit poll) 8 in 2015 (10 in the exit poll) 12 in 2017 (14 in the exit poll) 11 in 2019 (13 in the exit poll) I wonder if some of that is down to it adding probabilities of seat wins. If the Lib Dems have a small chance of winning a lot of different seats, it's plausible they could take only one or two but the exit poll will project a fairly high figure. UKIP got overestimated in 2015 for similar reasons. Same happened with the Greens in 2015/17. Assume Brighton Pavillion is near 100%, and all the other small fractions easily add up to a second seat. |
|
|
|
Post by Robert Waller on Dec 16, 2019 10:09:24 GMT
I don't think the individual seat projections in the exit poll was a very good idea, as it detracts from the impression of its overall accuracy. I note that in the BBC coverage they didn't show Jeremy Vine's 'wall' much as the night went on. I know of at least one viewer who thought that colouring it in meant the seat had actually changed hands, for example Cities of London and Westminster. Sky didn't use the seat predictions, not sure about ITV.
I believe they only polled in 144 constituencies, leaving over 500 with no sample at all.
The idea is not to produce any kind of national vote share, but to look at the situation in different types of marginal contest.
A key element is that they use the same polling stations as last time and calculate changes in these.
Inevitably they will miss factors that affect individual seats.
The only real overall weakness was Scotland. As John Curtice pointed out, they had few polling stations there and were far less confident about the situation 'north of the border'.
I also thought they were slow in updating the overall projection, for example the SNP was still projected to get 52 when it was obvious that the would get fewer.
Overall, though, the methodology still worked pretty well.
|
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,456
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Dec 23, 2019 10:07:30 GMT
Each of the past four exit polls have overestimated the Lib Dems by precisely two seats. 57 in 2010 (59 in the exit poll) 8 in 2015 (10 in the exit poll) 12 in 2017 (14 in the exit poll) 11 in 2019 (13 in the exit poll) I wonder if some of that is down to it adding probabilities of seat wins. If the Lib Dems have a small chance of winning a lot of different seats, it's plausible they could take only one or two but the exit poll will project a fairly high figure. UKIP got overestimated in 2015 for similar reasons. I'd agree with that, that it's the fractions that turn up these 'other' seats |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,456
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Dec 23, 2019 10:09:30 GMT
Unfortunately no official confirmation of these but I'm hoping the Nuffield study gives them out like it did in 2015. In 2017 when nearly all the results were out you could kind of estimate them from Emily Maitlis' graphic comparing the changes in the results so far to the exit poll. I kind of wish they would release the shares later though I understand the need to focus on seats |
|
|
|
Post by casualobserver on Dec 31, 2019 14:59:02 GMT
This country has gone completely mad. It is in the throes of a collective mental breakdown. I just wish I was young enough to go live somewhere else. Stupid, stupid people voting for their own destitution. May I point out to his Lordship that a major factor in Labour losing so many Leave voters to the Conservatives was the voters’ natural aversion to being called ‘stupid’ by senior elements in the Labour Party because of how they had voted in the referendum? May I cordially invite his Lordship, over the coming months and years, to continue in the name of the Liberal Democrats to label the electorate ‘stupid’ so that his Party may see how well that goes down with those from whom his Party seeks support in future? |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Dec 31, 2019 22:30:28 GMT
This country has gone completely mad. It is in the throes of a collective mental breakdown. I just wish I was young enough to go live somewhere else. Stupid, stupid people voting for their own destitution. May I point out to his Lordship that a major factor in Labour losing so many Leave voters to the Conservatives was the voters’ natural aversion to being called ‘stupid’ by senior elements in the Labour Party because of how they had voted in the referendum? May I cordially invite his Lordship, over the coming months and years, to continue in the name of the Liberal Democrats to label the electorate ‘stupid’ so that his Party may see how well that goes down with those from whom his Party seeks support in future? Might we ask that he reconsider and ignores his age for once. We believe the Congo Republic or South Sudan might be less noisome to his lordship? We are stupidly delighted to think of his complete absence. What a total tosser that man is ........ Even for a Lib Dem. |
|
|
|
Post by robert1 on Jan 1, 2020 8:33:39 GMT
In the spirit of 2020 can I please ask everyone to avoid the sort of abuse displayed in the last line of the previous comment.
Happy New Year to everyone.
|
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jan 1, 2020 9:06:53 GMT
In the spirit of 2020 can I please ask everyone to avoid the sort of abuse displayed in the last line of the previous comment. Happy New Year to everyone. Happy New Year to you Robert. A good resolution! |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Jan 1, 2020 10:54:17 GMT
In the spirit of 2020 can I please ask everyone to avoid the sort of abuse displayed in the last line of the previous comment. Happy New Year to everyone. The spirit of 2020 is going involve some of us taking great pleasure in the sheer misery of the pro-EU fanatics. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 1, 2020 11:28:29 GMT
In the spirit of 2020 can I please ask everyone to avoid the sort of abuse displayed in the last line of the previous comment. Happy New Year to everyone. You may always ask and gain the Browie Points from the po-faced. A very happy New Year to you. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jan 1, 2020 14:33:07 GMT
This country has gone completely mad. It is in the throes of a collective mental breakdown. I just wish I was young enough to go live somewhere else. Stupid, stupid people voting for their own destitution. May I point out to his Lordship that a major factor in Labour losing so many Leave voters to the Conservatives was the voters’ natural aversion to being called ‘stupid’ by senior elements in the Labour Party because of how they had voted in the referendum? May I cordially invite his Lordship, over the coming months and years, to continue in the name of the Liberal Democrats to label the electorate ‘stupid’ so that his Party may see how well that goes down with those from whom his Party seeks support in future? For balance here, I think it only fair to observe that if Corbyn had won a landslide victory , many of the blue team would be on here proclaiming about " Stupid stupid people voting for the destruction of the economy/our way of life etc". I even remember someone on here saying that if Corbyn ever got in Downing St you'd never get him out again!!
Can everyone make a NY resolution to try to take your tinted glasses off from time to time please?
|
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Jan 1, 2020 15:06:23 GMT
May I point out to his Lordship that a major factor in Labour losing so many Leave voters to the Conservatives was the voters’ natural aversion to being called ‘stupid’ by senior elements in the Labour Party because of how they had voted in the referendum? May I cordially invite his Lordship, over the coming months and years, to continue in the name of the Liberal Democrats to label the electorate ‘stupid’ so that his Party may see how well that goes down with those from whom his Party seeks support in future? For balance here, I think it only fair to observe that if Corbyn had won a landslide victory , many of the blue team would be on here proclaiming about " Stupid stupid people voting for the destruction of the economy/our way of life etc". I even remember someone on here saying that if Corbyn ever got in Downing St you'd never get him out again!!
Can everyone make a NY resolution to try to take your tinted glasses off from time to time please?
No! That is the only fun bit about losing and a natural reaction. |
|
|
|
Post by manchesterman on Jan 1, 2020 18:48:01 GMT
For balance here, I think it only fair to observe that if Corbyn had won a landslide victory , many of the blue team would be on here proclaiming about " Stupid stupid people voting for the destruction of the economy/our way of life etc". I even remember someone on here saying that if Corbyn ever got in Downing St you'd never get him out again!!
Can everyone make a NY resolution to try to take your tinted glasses off from time to time please?
No! That is the only fun bit about losing and a natural reaction. well you could have gone with it then given it up after a week like all the other NY resolutions! |
|
|
|
Post by andrew111 on Jan 1, 2020 22:54:21 GMT
In the spirit of 2020 can I please ask everyone to avoid the sort of abuse displayed in the last line of the previous comment. Happy New Year to everyone. The spirit of 2020 is going involve some of us taking great pleasure in the sheer misery of the pro-EU fanatics. Shades of Nero.... |
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Jan 2, 2020 0:31:05 GMT
This country has gone completely mad. It is in the throes of a collective mental breakdown. I just wish I was young enough to go live somewhere else. Stupid, stupid people voting for their own destitution. A thing of beauty If he had any self awareness he would realise that that the collective mental breakdown over Brexit occurred largely in his party. |
|
|
|
Post by 🏴☠️ Neath West 🏴☠️ on Jan 2, 2020 8:26:14 GMT
|
|
clyde1998
SNP
Green (E&W) member; SNP supporter
Posts: 1,765
|
Post by clyde1998 on Jan 2, 2020 13:45:21 GMT
Still within the 3% margin of error, as ~64% of the BBC/ITN exit polls have been. The team should be patting themselves on the back. Absolutely. Even looking at the seat predictions, there are a number of screwups but most of them are explainable.
Their model evidently couldn't take account of huge personal votes unwinding in Ynys Môn and Norfolk North, both of which were blithely predicted to be 90%+ certain to be holds. They didn't do too greatly in Scotland, not only overestimating the SNP but also underestimating the Scottish LDs and particularly overestimating the SNP in the North, leading to Edinburgh W, NE Fife, Moray, and Caithness & Sutherland all at 99% or even 100% (Caithness) certain to go SNP and E Aberdeenshire not far behind (and Orkney & Shetland at 81%). They also overestimated the remain vote in Central London (leading to 97% Lab hold Kensington, and Westminster & City too close to call) and underestimating it in other Southern towns (leading to 88% Con gain Canterbury, as well as numerous "too close" calls that ended up not close.
They mostly modelled the Labour catastrophe across the Northern English ripped out heartland remarkably well - there were no Tory gains here that they were blindsided by even though there were several that they thought less than 50% likely and a few nearmisses they viewed as safe Labour. They did however completely fail to predict the Labour holds in Halifax (Con gain in the 90s, forget the number), Alyn & Deeside (Con gain 97) and Weaver Vale (Con gain 99), making these three arguably the biggest surprises of the night.
IIRC, there are only around 100-200 polling stations surveyed for the exit poll, which will make the Scottish estimate much more susceptible to error than England's. There may only be one polling station in Scotland in a SNP-Lib Dem constituency, which many be unrepresentative of the other constituencies of that type particularly when independence and Brexit support will come into play in addition to usual differences between constituencies such as personal votes, incumbency, local issues and tactical voting. In 2017, Gordon was predicted to go Lib Dem (or narrowly SNP over Lib Dem), as conventional methods would suggest that if the Lib Dems being roughly level, the SNP were down and the Conservatives were up across Scotland you'd get a Lib Dem gain (or near gain), but the Conservatives won it and the Lib Dem vote collapsed as the unionist vote moved from the Lib Dems to the Conservatives (which largely occurred between the 2015 UK and 2016 Scottish elections), making the Conservative vote increase over there and beyond what their national increase would suggest. |
|
|
|
Post by minionofmidas on Jan 2, 2020 14:11:52 GMT
Absolutely. Even looking at the seat predictions, there are a number of screwups but most of them are explainable.
Their model evidently couldn't take account of huge personal votes unwinding in Ynys Môn and Norfolk North, both of which were blithely predicted to be 90%+ certain to be holds. They didn't do too greatly in Scotland, not only overestimating the SNP but also underestimating the Scottish LDs and particularly overestimating the SNP in the North, leading to Edinburgh W, NE Fife, Moray, and Caithness & Sutherland all at 99% or even 100% (Caithness) certain to go SNP and E Aberdeenshire not far behind (and Orkney & Shetland at 81%). They also overestimated the remain vote in Central London (leading to 97% Lab hold Kensington, and Westminster & City too close to call) and underestimating it in other Southern towns (leading to 88% Con gain Canterbury, as well as numerous "too close" calls that ended up not close.
They mostly modelled the Labour catastrophe across the Northern English ripped out heartland remarkably well - there were no Tory gains here that they were blindsided by even though there were several that they thought less than 50% likely and a few nearmisses they viewed as safe Labour. They did however completely fail to predict the Labour holds in Halifax (Con gain in the 90s, forget the number), Alyn & Deeside (Con gain 97) and Weaver Vale (Con gain 99), making these three arguably the biggest surprises of the night.
IIRC, there are only around 100-200 polling stations surveyed for the exit poll, which will make the Scottish estimate much more susceptible to error than England's. There may only be one polling station in Scotland in a SNP-Lib Dem constituency Quite so. 144 polling stations of which just 12 were in Scotland (and none in Northern Ireland). Subsample madness is to be expected - same with the London vs provincial southern England thing. That the exit poll was so nearly accurate regarding the Con seat figure (and thus majority over all other parties) was thus quite a bit of dumb luck; some difficult-to-prevent errors cancelling each other out. |
|
nodealbrexiteer
Forum Regular
non aligned favour no deal brexit!
Posts: 4,456
|
Post by nodealbrexiteer on Jan 3, 2020 13:37:32 GMT
In actual fact, the exit poll slightly overstated the Tory victory in both seat and vote terms (the latter was actually 45-33 rather than 46-32) It has entered legend that the poll was correct. In fact, it was quite a long way off , and in Scotland to an extent that makes a big difference. The authors of the poll admit cancelling errors in their methodology but I would call it harsh to be described as way off and as with all the exit pols from 1997 I think it revealed all the big messages about the result |
|
