UK General Election 2017

[Nearly Sane]

Actually that isn't true - the poll reported overnight involved polling about 50,000 people, which is hugely greater than the standard polls which typically involve just 1000 people.

The difference is in the way the data are modelled to predict the vote share and seat distribution. That is apparently a largely new approach, so might be right or could be way off. All we know really is that YouGov claim to have trialled this in the EU referendum and it got the result correct.

They have suggested a wide range of possible outcomes, involving a range of seats won. What was published was their 'central' prediction.

Actually it is in terms of the seats themselves which is the point. BTW did YouGov predict Brexit?

[ProfessorDavey]

Actually it is in terms of the seats themselves which is the point.

Sorry I don't understand.

BTW did YouGov predict Brexit?

Of their last 4 published polls before the referendum two had remain ahead, and two had leave ahead.

But this is apparently an entirely different methodology - one that they tested, but didn't use for their published polls last year (which used their standard methodology). Apparently this new methodology predicted brexit.

Make of that what you will.

[Nearly Sane]

Sorry I don't understand.
Of their last 4 published polls before the referendum two had remain ahead, and two had leave ahead.

But this is apparently an entirely different methodology - one that they tested, but didn't use for their published polls last year (which used their standard methodology). Apparently this new methodology predicted brexit.

Make of that what you will.

So it's a new methodology which predicted something but they didn't show their working before the thing they predicted. Even if true, it's all a bit post hoc surely?

As to the bit you didn't understand, so the sample is bigger but it is making predictions on smaller constituency areas. Now I presume it is weighted to marginal constituencies but in the absence of that  information this equates to 77 people per constituency.

[Udayana]

The model is designed to overcome some of the problems with normal polling, by taking demographic and other information into account in trying to predict vote outcomes for individual constituencies.

More details here: https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/05/31/how-yougov-model-2017-general-election-works/

Quite interesting.

   

[Nearly Sane]

The model is designed to overcome some of the problems with normal polling, by taking demographic and other information into account in trying to predict vote outcomes for individual constituencies.

More details here: https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/05/31/how-yougov-model-2017-general-election-works/

Quite interesting.

   

And yet it seems to me to precisely inflate problems with polling. Note taking a larger sample with different considerations about who you poll should work better for the referendum. But here we have a smaller % sample for each constituency used to extrapolate across different constituencies to average an outcome. Now, it may work but it seems currently to me to have basic problems as to how it can.

[Nearly Sane]

So Corbyn will now take part in the debate. I can see the logic but given the circs would have sent McDonnell


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40105324

[jakswan]

So Corbyn will now take part in the debate. I can see the logic but given the circs would have sent McDonnell

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40105324

I think he has played a blinder.

[Nearly Sane]

I think he has played a blinder.

Certainly May has not. I half wanted him to say that McDonnell was appearing, then turn up at the last minute, after McDonnell was on stage with a pint of Guinness, hand it to McDonnell and say 'Enjoy that in the green room, John, I've got this'

[Udayana]

My twopence: He definitely needs to show his face in competition/discussion with the other parties.

Suspect he would do better against May rather than Rudd - best would have been in the ITV debate without the Tories at all.

Still, if he can't make a good case for himself and Labour policies then what use would he be as a PM?

[Nearly Sane]

My twopence: He definitely needs to show his face in competition/discussion with the other parties.

Suspect he would do better against May rather than Rudd - best would have been in the ITV debate without the Tories at all.

Still, if he can't make a good case for himself and Labour policies then what use would he be as a PM?

So that's May out since she would appear not only to be unable to but hiding it.

[Udayana]

May can win with a huge majority, just based on the conservative nature of older voters, even when they know they will end up worse off, they might trust her as a "strong and stable" incumbent.

She is fine at making planned speeches aimed at grabbing the centre ground but her actual policies don't support them. In a way the less she appears the better - she can send out Davis and Rudd. 

[Nearly Sane]

May can win with a huge majority, just based on the conservative nature of older voters, even when they know they will end up worse off, they might trust her as a "strong and stable" incumbent.

She is fine at making planned speeches aimed at grabbing the centre ground but her actual policies don't support them. In a way the less she appears the better - she can send out Davis and Rudd.

so you say Corbyn is bad if he cannot appear and be impressive, but May is good because she doesn't appear because she can't? Seems oddly contradictory.

[Udayana]

I'm just suggesting, from my humble, inexperienced and insignificant role as spectator, what each could do to gain the best support. I think they will both be mostly useless if installed.

May has a strong team she can send out to defend her and the Conservative policies, Corbyn needs to show he can lead from the front.

[wigginhall]

May has a strong team?  Eh?   Who is that?   

[Nearly Sane]

I'm just suggesting, from my humble, inexperienced and insignificant role as spectator, what each could do to gain the best support. I think they will both be mostly useless if installed.

May has a strong team she can send out to defend her and the Conservative policies, Corbyn needs to show he can lead from the front.

Strong? Fallon? Johnson? Hammond? Fox, sorry the disgraced Luam Fox? What definition are you using in your insignificant opinion for strong?

[Udayana]

Er ... Fallon, Hammond, Davis, Rudd, Greening are all able to go on air and win support for Tory policies. Corbyn has McDonnell and Thornberry. He could use Starmer and Chakrbarti but doesn't seem to.

Most of the stronger Labour people seem to have been sidelined... Benn, Umunna.. others?

[Nearly Sane]

Er ... Fallon, Hammond, Davis, Rudd, Greening are all able to go on air and win support for Tory policies. Corbyn has McDonnell and Thornberry. He could use Starmer and Chakrbarti but doesn't seem to.

Most of the stronger Labour people seem to have been sidelined... Benn, Umunna.. others?

Fallon is a disaster wandering about. See where he thought Johnson's quote was one of Corbyn's . Hammond got his figures out by 20 billion, now you think Abbott was bad but he's the chancellor. Davis doesn't understand the issue with the border between NI and Eire and he is in charge of Brexit. Keep drinking the Daily Mail

[Nearly Sane]

Theresa green. May is yellow

[Udayana]

Fallon is a disaster wandering about. See where he thought Johnson's quote was one of Corbyn's . Hammond got his figures out by 20 billion, now you think Abbott was bad but he's the chancellor. Davis doesn't understand the issue with the border between NI and Eire and he is in charge of Brexit. Keep drinking the Daily Mail

Totally unjust accusation!

Anyone can get figures mixed up, btw. wouldn't count it against them. 

[wigginhall]

I've seen Greening arguing for grammar schools (she's my MP); well, she needs some better acting lessons.

[Udayana]

I think she made it clear that she didn't believe in them despite putting the case as well as possible

This is politics ... a branch of acting?

[Nearly Sane]

Totally unjust accusation!

Anyone can get figures mixed up, btw. wouldn't count it against them.

Sorry , tad confused, you seemed to argue that May's 'team' was good. What was the issue with pointing out that they appear not to be?

[Udayana]

I meant about reading the Mail.

"Good" is mostly a subjective impression, but at least they need to be able to put the arguments for the position they're taking.

[JP]

Just confirmed to me that these "debates" are a waste of time. Bunch of bickering kids each and every one of them.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

They call her mellow yellow.