Panelbase

[casualobserver]

Apr 23, 2015 15:33:39 GMT Pimpernal said:

Apr 5, 2015 19:12:56 GMT tonygreaves said:

Or refloat after this election.

In Swale the lib dems are standing only 7 candidates - for the main part old stalwarts who held office over a decade ago and whose names always go forward as paper candidates.
Personally I think it will be easier to fight back if they do have few candidates to get abysmal ratings, and can make a more convincing comeback in 415 years time if they can boast a trebeling of candidate numbers and have a couple of wards they can make an effort to be relevant in.
It could be a long climb back, but it's easier to start with an improvement than a continued struggle...

Corrected that for you!


Seriously, though, the phenomenon of the LibDem collapse in Swale needs to be put into some historical context. 1. The LibDems only really took off during the difficult Conservative local election years of the 1990s. 2. They lost a couple of key activists who migrated out of the area. 3. They never really established themselves politically in any ward - it always remained the individual who got support, not the party. 4. The new LibDem blood in the last 13 years has been anaemic - its just bad luck for them, geographically, that no new activist(s) have come along who are capable of re-invigorating the group locally. 5. Labour's co-ordinated local election successes over the last 13 years have given anti-Tory voters a more credible party to rally around than the LibDems.

[The Bishop]

Latest poll: Lab 34 Con 32 UKIP 17 LibDem 8 Green 4.

[tonygreaves]

<yawn>

[Robert Waller]

Panelbase
LAB 33% (-1), CON 31% (-1%), UKIP 16% (-1), LD 8% (NC), GRN 5% (+1), SNP 5%, OTH 2

[Andrew_S]

SNP 47%
Con 27%
Lab 15%
LD 4%

whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/how-would-you-be-likely-to-vote-in-a-uk-general-election?groups=null&companies=[%2274df1b10-8d73-47d2-ad16-a1c0011d7415%22]#table

[Deleted]

Feb 5, 2017 16:07:08 GMT Andrew_S said:

SNP 47%
Con 27%
Lab 15%
LD 4%

whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/how-would-you-be-likely-to-vote-in-a-uk-general-election?groups=null&companies=[%2274df1b10-8d73-47d2-ad16-a1c0011d7415%22]#table

Ooh I say! 

[jollyroger93]

Feb 5, 2017 16:07:08 GMT Andrew_S said:

SNP 47%
Con 27%
Lab 15%
LD 4%

whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/how-would-you-be-likely-to-vote-in-a-uk-general-election?groups=null&companies=[%2274df1b10-8d73-47d2-ad16-a1c0011d7415%22]#table

Fair to say the Scottish Tories are back!

[Deleted]

[The Bishop]

I think there is a previous thread for these?

[John Chanin]

Yes. AdminSTB can we move this to the existing Panelbase thread?

[Deleted]

Done.

[Deleted]

Apr 26, 2017 16:17:13 GMT @strinity said:

Done.

Thanks.

[finsobruce]

Apr 26, 2017 16:06:18 GMT The Bishop said:

I think there is a previous thread for these?

is it more or less misleading than this one?

[mondialito]

[Deleted]

[Tom]

Pollsters setting themselves up for another big fail with the Labour score I think.

[Deleted]

May 16, 2017 15:11:03 GMT Tom said:

Pollsters setting themselves up for another big fail with the Labour score I think.

Yes, totally agreed.

[Pete Whitehead]

Yep anything over 30% is wrong - 33% is just fucking embarrassing

[Sibboleth]

It is certainly possible that some polling firms are overstating the Labour vote (similarly it's not impossible that this is also true of the Conservative vote) but if the argument for why this must be the case is "INCONCEIVABLE!" then... er...

[The Bishop]

Also let us not forget that if there is any uncertainty about their findings, since the last GE pollsters have generally given the Tories the benefit of the doubt.