Should you bet on the poll that’s worst for Ken?
April 24th, 2008
Will the “golden rule” apply again next week?
So far four polling firms have produced surveys on the 2008 London Mayoral race and it looks as though each will be doing at least one further survey for publication in the next week.
What’s great about this contest is that it’s about aggregate vote totals across London and we’ll be able to compare directly the performance of each polling firm with the actual result. In this election there is no hiding for YouGov, Ipsos-MORI, ICM and MRUK and their respective performances will play a key part in shaping attitudes to each of them ahead of the next general election. This is one they will be doing everything to get right.
People keep on emailing me to ask which pollster I will “be betting one”? The answer is that I’ll probably go with the one that most fits the polling “form-book”.
For based on performances at the last four general elections and in the mayoral races of 2000 and 2004 the golden rule is to choose the survey that is showing Ken in the least favourable position. For in all of those battles the pollster that was most right about Labour/Ken versus the Tories was the one where the former was predicted to be doing worse.
Just look at the record. In 2005 NOP had the lowest lead for Labour and came out best. In 2001 it was the same as in 1997 and 1992.
Click on the year links to UKPollingReport to see what happened. The same occurred in the last two mayoral races and at the last Euro elections in 2004. The pollster showing Labour/Ken in the most unfavourable position against the Tories turned out to be the least inaccurate.
It is this record of consistent Labour/Ken overstatement that reinforces my opposition to poll averaging. In each case the figures least favourable to Labour/Ken were a much better guide than the average.
The mayoral betting has continued to be stable with Boris at about 0.6/1 and Ken on 2.6/1 1.6/1.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Your “golden rule” makes sense given that Livingstone has been more popular with voters less likely to actually go to the polls.
Is is possible, however, that in this election Boris also has a fan base that includes many infrequent (or never) voters?
Kind of like the Obama girl, who made the Super Tuesday party but not NY primary!
Must say it looks like Livingstone is slowly but surely deflating, and that Boris looks set to the the Jimmy Walker of the 21st century.
And I once thought (and foolishly said) that Boris Johnson has as much chance of being London Mayor as Dick Whittington’s dead cat.
The pix above is very interesting.
BORIS JOHNSON looks like an accountant trying to digest his lunch. Hair is weidly neat; what happened to the weed wacker? Suit & time conservative enough for a banker to be buried in (in Fargo if not London). Guy looks oldly mature if also constipated.
KEN LIVINGSTON looks like a gambler resting from a losing session at the Wheel of Fortune, prepatory to taking a last stroll in the casino garden. Have cottoned on that the light suit and tie are a symbol that he’s respectable and non-elitist. And what does it matter if Jewish voters are turned off by a brown suit?
BRIAN PATTEN is going sans tie, open collar to differentiate himself from the opposition. Even though he’s talking he’s the opposite of the center of attention. Though when you do give him a gander, you see a decent, earnest guy with ramrood (if un-straight) posture who would get my vote (and I’m a Labourite) but not my bet.
2
Ha! Ha! Ha!
I love it: the constipated accountant, the anxious gambler, and the young decent cop!
You’ll vote for the underdog but put your money on the accountant!
re 2. The pic is a screen grab which I took from Sunday’s BBC debate
Mike,
You did not put that thread into the London-mayoral-race category :
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/category/london-mayoral-race/
Did Drudge
yellowed Clinton’s teeth?
http://www.drudgereport.com/
Songs of the Upcoming Primary States
LITTLE PINK HOUSES
Last night, John Mellancamp performed at the Obama rally in Indiana. Is significant that this native Hoosier who backed John Edwards is now strumming and singing for Barack Obama.
Note that this song mentions both the presidency and betting!
LITTLE PINK HOUSES
John Mellancamp
There’s a black man with a black cat
Living in a black neighborhood
He’s got an interstate
Runnin through his front yard
You know, he thinks he’s got it so good
And there’s a woman in the kitchen
Cleanin up the evening slops
And he looks at her and says
Hey darling, I can remember when
You could stop a clock
Oh but ain’t that America for you and me
Ain’t that America someting to see baby
Ain’t that America home of the free
Little pink houses for you and me
Well theres a young man in a t-shirt
Listening to a rock’n'roll station
Hes got greasy hair, greasy smile
He says Lord this must be my destination
Cause they told me when I was younger
Boy, you’re gonna be President
But just like everything else
Those old crazy dreams
Just kinda came and went
Oh but ain’t that America for you and me
Ain’t that America someting to see baby
Ain’t that America home of the free
Little pink houses for you and me
Well theres people and more people
What do they know, know, know?
Go to work in some high rise
And vacation down at the Gulf of Mexico
And there’s winners and there’s losers
But they ain’t no big deal
Cause the simple man baby pays
For the thrills the bills
And the pills that kill
Oh but ain’t that America for you and me
Ain’t that America someting to see baby
Ain’t that America home of the free
Little pink houses for you and me
Please forgive my going O/T quite so soon, but my attention has been drawn to the following post in the thread before last:
“156: your pensioner living abroad doesn’t pay UK tax either, mirthios. Try again.
by Nick Palmer MP April 23rd, 2008 at 6:23 pm”
This load of old pony is another perfect example of Labour Members of Parliament opening their mouths before putting their brains into gear. So like their Glorious Leader.
If I provide the P60s for each of the ex-pat pensioners living in just one little village out here, will Palmer pay the difference in tax this year from his very generous expense allowance, or are we really too poor to bother about?
Thought not!
Clown.
7 - By one account on CNN last night John Mellencamp didn’t come out for Obama and will be performing similarly for a Clinton rally too.
Mike - I think you mean 1.6/1 for Livingstone.
Mike, I wonder if there isn’t a bit of lying to pollsters going on. I’ve met several people who have told me that they are pretending to vote for Livingstone — because their friends will scream abuse at them if they don’t — but will behave very differently in the polling booth. Admittedly they’re hacks who know how rotten the Livingstone administration has become and journalists are hardly a large slice of the electorate, but still…
11. I think people can speak freely and in confidence to their pollsters without fear of ‘lefty’ intimidation!
Fair enough, Roger, but didn’t pollsters in the Nineties explain their overestimate of the Labour vote by talking about ’silent Tories’ or something similar? Or was that just the polling companies trying to pass the buck for the fact that their predictions were wrong?
If Nick Cohen @ 11 & 13 is right about social pressure to lie to pollsters, then we can expect Yougov to be most accurate since filling in an internet poll is likely to be done alone. The phone pollsters are probably most likely to be misled since these days most people have phones in family rooms. Casual observation (which may be wrong) suggests face-to-face pollsters interview single people, and there should be no stigma about announcing support for Boris to a complete stranger.
13 I think ’shy Tory syndrome’ was the embarrassment of allowing their greed and self interest to get the better of their social conscience and not wanting to share that with their pollster. I don’t think that applies in the mayoral election election
John L - don’t also forget that a higher proportion of the small c conservative middle classes subscribe to Telephone Preference Service and are therefore excluded from the telephone pollsters population
15 - Yes Roger, all Conservative voters are greedy, slavering wretches. I suppose the reason that Labour voters are a disappearing phenomenon is that we simply cannot see them from behind the glow of their halos. One day you and many others on here of all persuasions might realise that everyone is aiming at the same place they just have different means of getting there.
17. I thought that was the common explanation for ’shy’ Tories? It was even found to exist in exit polls. How do you explain it?
18 - Well one would have to look at whether the phenomena fluctuated over time and whether it corellated with the fortunes of the party. I certainly wouldn’t impugn the motives of anyone who votes in a way other than me.
Nick 11. After having read some of the stuff coming out of the Guardian-Observer at the moment I guess it will take somebody really bold there to admit to not supporting Ken.
I find the approach to reporting polls quite appalling. The last MORI poll in the Observer had Boris 6% ahead on first preferences - a fact that you would have been hard pressed to find in the paper. What brought that down to 2% after second preferences was based, if you looked at the detailed data, on the way 31 people split. As I pointed out before the rounding this was 2.8% but all we heard was a two point Boris lead.
The Guardian group appears to have suspended its normally excellent critical faculties when it comes to this election.
“Nick 11. After having read some of the stuff coming out of the Guardian-Observer at the moment I guess it will take somebody really bold there to admit to not supporting Ken”
Are you being ironic Mike? Nick also writes for the Standard the like of whose bias hasn’t been seen since the great days of Pravda!
17. On this occasion, I’m going to have to agree with Roger, at least in as far as the historical Shy Tory Syndrome goes. For a long time (probably from the introduction of the Poll Tax through to Cameron’s election, so about 15 years), a large proportion of the population thought it was socially questionable at best to vote Tory. Of course, most of these people didn’t vote Tory - they voted Labour, Lib Dem or something else, or didn’t vote at all - but some did, they just didn’t like admitting to it.
Is that embarassment factor still the case, either nationally or in the context of the London vote? On the national scene, I suspect probably not, or at least it is very much reduced. In London, it might be a different matter. Boris has been doing serious for a while now but there’s still enough history of him playing the jester for some people to be put off admitting to plan to vote for him. That said, Livingstone has enough negatives of his own to justify people becoming shy at announcing their backing for him. On top of that, my suspicion is that the actual combined vote share for Boris+Ken will be lower than is projected in the polls.
Where does that leave us (or me)? Probably with a Boris win. He is ahead, and although the polling gap has closed a little, I think most of the overstatement in the polls is of Livingstone. Why do I think that? Partly, it’s because there are more acceptable alternatives on the left to him than there are for Boris on the right - notably Paddick, but also Berry for the Greens. Partly, it’s because of the likely differential turnout which I still don’t think is being adequately factored in. Partly, it’s still the shy-Tory syndrome.
Does this justify the gap in the odds? Probably, but to me it’s very tight and not much value either way.
I see the Guardian is running a story about Blair and Campbell masterminding Kens campaign.
Everything Campbell touches does not turn out fine.
Look at the last Lions tour to New Zealand when Campbell was press spokesman.
What a disaster.
The same is happening here.
Mike, the Observer and Guardian are separate papers. The Obs let me do a big piece saying that Livingstone wasn’t fit to be Labour candidate a few months ago and I had another pop at him last week. I genuinely don’t know what happened with that poll, but, and I know commentators on this site may find it hard to believe, mistakes in newspapers aren’t always the result of sinister political conspiracies. Sometimnes they’re just cock ups
One thing to be aware of is that the phone pollsters are “scared sh*tless” by this election. It’s high profile and their pre-May 1 surveys will affect their reputations in a big way.
The massive issue for them is measuring turnout and some of the figures we have seen of those saying they are 100% certain are beyond belief.
The problem is not about shy Tories or shy Ken supporters - it’s about people being shy about admitting to polling interviewers that they are not 100% certain to vote.
Remember less than 37% of the London electorate voted in 2004. Certain to vote shares in the 50-60% region are not credible. In 2000 one leading pollster in its eve of poll survey had more than 50% saying they were certain. On the day the turnout was 35%.
But aren’t YouGov showing even higher certainty to vote?
11- Nick Cohen- glad to see that you have come out as the out and out Tory I have long suspected. Will bear this in mind when I read your work in future.
26 No, because it’s a panel, and thus not directly comparable.
27 Nick Cohen has said he supports Paddick.
O/T Mike Smithson- in a sad moment last moment I scrolled though some of the archives of pbCOM.
What struck me is that you haven’t changed the formula at all right from the start and your only poster was “big n*pples”.
What a simple, but effective idea pbCOM is. You must be really chuffed how this site’s profile has risen.
21. come up with evidence to back up your claims about Osborne wanting to hang Mandela yet Roger? Or your claims that yougov changed methodologies?
I watched Yvette Cooper last night, it was painful. Paxman had her in the corner and he knew it, all she could do is repeat her pre-prepared phrase over and over again as he laughed at her, knowing that she couldn’t answer what was a simple question. Then she reverted to having a go at Osborne and the tories, something which hasn’t worked even slightly for Brown so far so god knows she thought it would work.
The news wasn’t complimentary last night either, really laid into Brown and showed Cameron’s loser not leader line.
(cue Roger whinging about tories taking over the site etc etc)
re 26. YouGov are not measuring certainty to vote at the moment. All their surveys take place with members of their polling panel on whom they have a mass of data going back many years much of which is validated and re-validated time and time again.
re 27. To be opposed to what he sees as a corrupt regime does not make someone a Tory.
I always thought it socially unacceptable to vote Labour. Funnily enough so did most of my friends, none of whom were or are members of any political party.
I don’t think any were shy Labourites either!
Mike Smithson @ 25 re shy non-voters.
One obvious explanation is that non-voters are also less willing to be interviewed by pollsters.
30, seems that Cooper is the Treasury’s spokesman whenever the news is bad (which has been quite frequently of late). Still, at least she turned up unlike Brown, or Darling.
Come the election (general) be fascinating to watch Brown QT and Brown Vs Paxman.
28- but sean, by putting the boot in on Ken will only lead to one outcome, and that ain’t Paddick becoming Mayor.
Nick strikes me as one of those dishonest lefties. He is so critical with much of the liberal left, mostly due to his obsession with Islamism, that the solution is obvious. All he has to do is look in the mirror and see the reflection of a bonafide Tory.
34. I can see Brown trying to avoid them. I wouldn’t say Cameron is the master of public speaking but he does have a bit of flair for it, he can deal with awkward questions and doesn’t get riled easily anymore. Brown will get stuttery and flustered, especially against Paxman. He’s always run away when trouble was brewing, now he’ll have to face it all head on against Paxman, and against the public. I can’t see him being able to deal with it at all.
o/t Another result to watch for next week - Kelvin Mackenzie is standing for Borough Councillor in Elmbridge BC next week (article in Speccie), on platform of reduced car park charges, reduction in Council Leader Salary and closure of final salary pension scheme.
http://tinyurl.com/6rnjw5
“Fare increases after the election” according to the BBC, signed off by Ken and previously denied by him with regards to Crossrail.
What exactly did Brown and Darling promise? Its a good job Labour people come from a union background! Police pay was subject to binding arbitration and yet……Frank Field is either a liar or an idiot and the same goes for the rest of the “rebels”.
Paddick is certainly coming over as the only candidate worthy of consideration but everybody has discounted his chances from the beginning of this contest. LibDems have in the past acquired a reputation for dirty fighting at a local level and the nasty aftertaste from past skirmishes may be damaging Paddick’s chances through no fault of his own. Pity!
26, 27 Seeing you care so much. I will be voting Labour for the assembly elections! Like others on the London Left, a minority I grant you, I find Livingstone’s decision to turn his back on liberal-minded Muslims and embrace the far Right, unconscionable. Anti-fascism must always come first.
31- Mike- I have read both Nick’s critiques of Tony Blair, and his latest What’s Left.
Would completely recommend Nick Cohen’s works- a great thinker. But I have long thought that he is a Tory just waiting to come out.
re 33. Agreed - but then why have previous Mayoral phone polls shown such a massive overstatement of Ken’s position?
A general point is that you hardly ever see the pollsters being subject to serious criticism in the national media. It is only sites like this and Anthony Wells’s UK PollingReport where their techniques come under scrutiny.
Getting very worried about Ken’s polling. The postal votes have already been sent out which will be a crucial factor in determining the lazy Conservative vote. Whether Ken’s campaign machine has done enough to counter this is a difficult one.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
27. Tyson. He was the writer I used to turn to first in the Observer and I thought he made as good an argument as anyone for supporting the invasion of Iraq. Recently though he seems to have taken the path of Melanie Phillips and his Islamaphobia colours everything including supporting Boris (under the fig leaf of a vote for Paddick)
39- you may want to know that I have had some arguments with one very good friend in particular (a Jewish intellectual who is captivated by everything that you write) about your political affiliations. So this issue has been quite important to me.
37 - Yeah, the repulsive slug can’t be bothered to get off his fat arse (as opposed to Jack W’s peachy well-toned) to walk the few minutes from his mansion to the station.
As for his
“For those who haven’t yet died of boredom, I will be sending a letter to the Spectator editor telling you how I did — frankly, if I beat the socialists I’ll be cracking open the Cloudy Bay!”
Er, Kelvin, that should be easy - there is no Labour candidate standing in Weybridge South.
28 & 31. Thanks. Don’t know where I picked that up.
Hope you are not having sad moments this morning Tyson.
I know a young journo who wrote scathing pieces about Gordon Brown for months. He now works as a press officer for the Labour Party!
[Voices for hire. Like barristers].
When his mother mentioned the details of his new job at a Christmas party to a mixed political group, it was met with a stunned awkward silence.
It was left to a paid up member of the Tory Party[!] to break the silence with an incisive ‘Aww…right..OK’, until someone’s husband [cough, cough] chuckled and said, ‘He’s a spin doctor!’.
43- I know Nick’s works very well. I completely agree with you on this one.
The Islamaphobia is really quite interesting. Rather than viewing Islamism in the UK as some crack pot movement run by a few incompetents who cannot even blow themselves up properly (as it quite clearly is), people like Nick/ Melanie Philips have fueled the silly terror/ clash of civilisations/ hatred agenda.
Can I beg a moment’s silence for Frank Field’s integrity? RIP
48. Yes
Pollster says our polling was so bad that ‘we suck’ !!!!!!
Will British pollsters be quite so forthcoming ????
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/04/where-did-we-go-wrong.html
30. Cuddles. As a 25 year old Tory happy to let your feminine side show through your username I have to say I’m quite a fan of your tenacious posting. So it’s with some surprise that you haven’t taken the trouble to read the articles that Mike carefully researched.
Here’s the quote from the Guardian article.
“The Johnson lead after second preference votes are counted is down from 53% to 47%, according to YouGov, which reported a gap as large as 14% four weeks ago before it readjusted its samples (so I am told) more accurately to reflect the capital’s population”.
47 - So what happened on 7/7 when these “incompetents” inflicted such carnage. Sometimes you can be very very silly (and that’s being charitable).
51. Okie dokie, then what about the Osborne claim? Any thoughts on that?
Did some tel canvassing in a Con/Lib marginal ward in west london last night. It was solid for Boris for what its worth. All the usual caveats etc
45 John O. Exceptionally observant of you to note that my ARSE has wonderful tone. Frankly there’s few finer sounds than the tuneful melody of ‘Britains bottom pollster’ !!
One funny vox pop in the current Pink Paper where it asks people who they’re going to vote for. One politicial ingenu replies that he’s not going to vote for Labour because they have raised car parking charges in Islington, so says perhaps he’ll vote Green instead.
I find such a complete lack of political understanding depressing.
52-John O- I know we do not agree on much, but surely you can see how it has been useful for politicians to ratchet up the terrorist threat?
Cohen, Philips and others are the politicians cheer leaders.
re 2 who’s Brian Patten - some long lost Tory? I think you mean Brian Paddick.
53- cuddles- I have heard the Osborne rumours too. The offending Mandela memorobilia was around in the late 80’s early 90’s, sported proudly by many young Tories, so certainly not beyond the realm of possibilities.
Frankly who care? But excellent to wind up Tories.
re 29 yes I also had a look at some of the earliest threads and the comments on some of those make the current crop of contributors look like models of rectitude.
57 - Oh, there I agree with you (though I would not count Nick Cohen with Phillips), but your post at 47 was extraordinarily insensitive and equally ‘extremist’ in the other direction.
37 I had forgotten about Kelvin McKenzie standing in Elmbridge! I had promised John O that I would go over to help ensure that he suffers an ignominious defeat.
re 60 Some of the “best”, certainly the noisiest, threads were at the time of the Hartlepool by election in September 2004.
The 2005 general election was a challenge and I think that we got through it well.
Next time with a possible change of government it might be harder.
Osborne joined the confederation of Conservative students. This gives you some information about his politics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_of_Conservative_Students
Also this from Guido’s site.
“Guido, there are rumours buzzing round that a certain newspaper, has a photo of George Osborne wearing a ‘Hang Nelson Mandela’ T shirt. Ah those great days when you stood shoulder to shoulder with George in the FCS, singing ‘We’re going to Hang Nelson Mandela’ Now that Dave has raised Nelson to the status of ‘Secular Saint’ can you confirm or deny this”
Admittedly none of this is proof but anyone who’d join an organization like this would have worn such a T-shirt with pride
60 - Yes, I do sometimes wish that David Herdson would be rather less raucous, and that Stodge fellow drives me to distraction. As for Innocent…
64 - So you have absolutely no proof for your slurs. Typical.
On Nick Cohen and the early days of PB - he was one of the first national journalists to notice the site and our biggest audience boost came on the Sunday in 2004 when he mentioned us.
Where I cannot forgive Nick is that in his book he describes me as an “unsuccessful gambler.”
64 Roger - answered you on this one. George Osborne is too young, he couldn’t have joined the FCS which was abolished while he was still at school and it’s more likely the source of T shirts was the IFF.
64. So basically you have no proof, at all, that he was wore that t-shirt? Your just assuming he must have.
54. Guido of Dale has also posted that FCS had disbanded 3 years before Osborne entered university.
I agree with Mike that the London Mayor contest is a big test for the pollsters.
48 and 49 it now looks like Brown has deceived Field and the rebels. A dishonourable move which will come back and bite Brown in the future. Up to now there was no organised opposition to Brown. When this deal unravels, there will now be a group of 50+ MPs who will feel deceived by Brown. This will fester.
54. I appologise - comment was for 64. Roger.
Bloody typical. You ask a perfectly civil question about polls and all you get in return is abuse. The actual quote from the book is
‘Nobody ever got rich betting against Tony Blair,’ sighed the unlucky gambler Mike Smithson who ran a tip sheet on the Net for political punters. Blair survived to face the next crisis, thanks to the most unlikely ally to come to his rescue in his charmed career: the socialists of the Iraqi trade union movement.
In context it’s perfectly clear that I’m talking about losing money by betting against Tony Blair and quoting the wisdom Mike has gained from the experiece. Not saying that he always backs three-legged horses.
Incidentally re the turnout point: There are very few posters around. Maybe they’re old fashioned and people don’t want them these days. But perhaps the public is nowhere near as excited by this election as the politicians and journalists
Good morning all , Mike , you keep saying that Yougov is a panel and therefore does not measure certainty to vote and yet almost 80% of the respondents express a voting intention which is far in excess of the population of London as a whole who will vote . This surely defies the basic principle of any polling that the sample should be representative of the population it is sampling . Now I do accept that Yougov may in fact be a representative sample of that part of the London population who do vote but that is not quite the same thing . I think differential turnout will be the key to this election and I suspect that should make Boris favourite .
OK, So I went to a Mayoral Hustings event last night - kinda wish everyone who intended to vote went to one. The general agreement of me and my missus was that Ken came across as slimy and devious, Boris I was most disappointed with - came across as bumbling and uncertain of things, and attempted to bluff the audience on there specialist subject (It was an evangelical christian hustings, and he kept attempting and failing to include bible quotes - either getting them wrong, misattributing them, only half remembering). As my missus said - you see a clip of him on telly for 30secs and you assume that there is more to Boris than just the clip and he comes across as ok - you sit and listen to him for an hour and a half and you reluctantly feel that perhaps there isn’t much to him after all. Brian was good in the hustings environment - ‘geeky but knew his stuff’ - ’sounds like he’d be good as a mayor, shame he has no charisma to enable him to get elected’
Conclusion - This Paddick voter was confirmed in that first choice - I really went to try and decide what to do with my 2nd vote. Previously had been leaning to Boris, now back to neither / a minor candidate.
Please..please please Roger..you were pointing out to Cuddles how an earlier thread showed him up but you dont seem to be able to let this go…can we not rehash this Osbourne bollocks again you are just wrong…George Osbourne was at school at the relvant time..I know this as I was at school with him..Its just rubbish and I know you woudl love it to be true but mentioning it again and again in the hope that the facts may chnage is just not going to make it happen.
O/T There seems to be a considerable discrepancy between the opposing parties’ views on what the amount of compensation should be for the Northern Rock shareholders should be!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/money/2008/04/24/cnrock124.xml
I still have an open “novelty bet” with Paddy Power that Northern Rock’s sale value pre the decision to nationalise it would be less than approx £1 per share. I wonder how long the court wrangling will go on before this bet can be settled?
68. Ted. It must be my blind prejudice then!
71. First the lobby, then the most rebellious MPs your own party.
welcome Nick Cohen.
After reading this site for a while I do not understand why most political journalists misinterpret the polls. They rarely put results in their true context and seem to have acquired little understanding on how polling is done.
I no longer read the MSM views on a poll until I have read views on here and on Anthony’s site.
If journalists only put some more effort into understanding these matters their work would be far more reliable.
There’s a rather circular argument that people from all sides are guilty of from time to time, but is especially common on the left*, involving two tempting but fallacious leaps of logic. It goes:
You don’t agree with me - therefore you must be a Tory.
You’re a Tory - therefore what you’re saying is wrong.
On the subject of shy Tories (a phenomenon I suspect is fading in the south to be replaced by shy Labour-ites(?) but is still common in the north) - this is nothing more than an unwillingness to publicly admit to an unfashionable opinion. You’ll seldom hear anyone expressing an enthusiasm for James Blunt, but clearly there are enough people who like bland middle-of-the-road music-for-people-who-don’t-like-music that he can forge a reasonably successful career. (Not me though. I like the Pixies and the Fall. Obviously.)
*But then I would say that, wouldn’t I?
@73:
I wouldn’t worry about it Nick. The true believers of Gordon are in a thoroughly abusive mood at the moment, for perhaps obvious reasons.
Anyway, I know for a fact you’ve endured far worse over on CiF.
The impression I’m getting on the doorstep is that this is the first election that people have been really excited about for the first time. Whether, given the fairly transient nature of London’s electorate, translates into decent turnout is anybody’s guess.
It’s good to see you here again, BTW, Nick. You are one of my absolute fave polemicists. You and your Euston chums to me are the ‘acceptable face’ of Liberal politics.
To address two technical polling points that arise from earlier comments.
1 - Telephone Preference Survey (TPS) doesn’t apply to market researcher. Nor does being ex-directory affect things. In practical terms what the dialler software does is select a *known* genuine telephone number and then randomise the last one or two digits in order to get a quasi-random number that is likely to be a genuine number. Many turn out to be business numbers, fax machines or simply numbers that don’t exist. These attempts will be shown in the rawest hole-count data but never make it into the final reports.
2 - Non-response bias sometimes matters, sometimes doesn’t. Where it does matter is where the act of non-responding is salient viz-a-viz the topic of the survey. Forecasting turnout in an election is almost the canonical case. It is a bit like using a survey to estimate how many people will respond to your survey! A very trickly problem. One I am glad I don’t have to try and solve.
Re journalists and polls. Roger Jowell who used to run the British Social Attitude Survey points out that no one, journalist or otherwise, should take them seriously. They’re done on the cheap and aren’t proper random surveys. His explanation for ’shy Tories’ wasn’t that people were lying but that Tories were less likely to stop and answer a pollster’s questions — they had work to get to, they tended not to see why they should give their time for nothing etc
The only way to get accurate polls for Mike to dissect would be to do what the big government and academic surveys do, pick a representative sample of addresses and keep going back to them until they got answers. Of course that would be far too expensive for media organisations, and take far too long.
Overstating by polls could be the result of being favourite. When voters think a candidate is certain to win, they may answer pollsters in the affirmative. That certainty to win, may also produce a, ‘Why bother, its in the bag’ affect on the day, leading to a lower turn out amongst the favourite’s supporters.
80 HFwhilst I agree with you on your comments re journalists nisinterpeting polls and lack of knowledge of how they are done that is also true of most of the partisan commentators on polls on here who constantly ignore M of E and treat 1 or 2 % changes in party support from poll to poll as being of profound significance .
39 - while I am delighted Nick Cohen is posting, I am disappointed that he has adopted the habit of referring to islamic extremists as “far right”. Without wishing to restart the debate about what constitutes “right” and “left”, or playing the futile game of trying to place disparate groups on that spectrum (if the spectrum even exists), I do wish that those who define themselves as “left” would realise that just because they disagree with something, it doesn’t make it “right” or (if the disagreenment is violent) “far right”.
One of my pet hates is the way leftists seek to define anything that is good as being of the left - most noticeable in their attempted ownership of the word “progressive”.
On the mayoral election: still no sign of Labour or Lib Dem canvassing in my neck of the woods (Whitechapel). Galloway has been past in his bus (not guilty on the stress ball front - mine would have missed) and the Tories have leafleted twice. My sense is that Boris is leading, and that those who question whether Ken’s voters will turn out are probably right - outside of the intellectual left (those who have suspended their critical faculties, that is) their is very little “must stop Boris” sentiment, so even the Ken supporters I have met are quite soft in their support. By contrast I know a lot of Boris supporters who would walk barefoot through snow to vote Ken out.
Of course, my sample is very limited and highly unrepresentative, so carries almost no weight, but I haven’t felt this sure of a good Tory showing in an election for many many years.
On the subject of polling I did take part in a recent ICM telephone poll. I did n’t realise they were combined with other market research questions. This one was a mind-numbingly awful one about the own-brand processed meats of different supermarkets. In fact the way it went on and on you could almost take it for a wind-up in a comedy show except the guy seemed deadly serious. In the end I could n’t stand it any longer and rang off. I assume the political answer is counted even if the call is n’t “finished”.
Wodger is a gobby slimeball. This is a man who owns four homes, earns £6,000 a day and talks about greed. YUK
89 Rodger’s stalker returns .
Frank Field this morning, like Nick Palmer last night, is still in denial.
Despite Cooper being pressed again and again last night on Newsnight, she would not clearly commit to any ‘compensation’ for the 10p losers being back dated saving only the 60-65 aged pensioners and their fuel allowance.
Indeed, the Darling letter to MPs about this only mentions backdating in paragraph 6 which refers to the pensioners.
Reading this letter you might get the impression that it is a general statement, but after Cooper last night it is clearly not so. Reading the letter again it is clear that each paragraph is referring to a separate group with a separate proposal to deal with them.
In paragraph 5 it starts to talk about the ‘help’ to be offered and it says “the two main groups we want to do more to help are… low paid workers and pensioners under 65..” That does not match what Field has been saying on the air this morning either.
There is inflammable flim flam here. Read it for yourself.
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Politics/documents/2008/04/23/MCFALLletter.pdf
[80][84] Quite. The MSM can either write up polls by journalists who don’t have the time to get into the stuff people here can, or else by the pollsters themselves! Presumably if the new editor of the Indy were to ask Our Genial Host for a weekly column on the perils of polls, he wouldn’t say no, even at their pathetic pay rates
@84:
It depends what you mean by “take them seriously”. On this site, there’s lots of New English Pounds to be won or lost based on what the polls do to the markets. Money talks, and so polls are serious business because polls are a big driver of the political betting markets. Quite possibly the largest.
Of course, if by that he meant “polls aren’t accurate” then it’s a statement trite to the point of meaninglessness. But then, they all feed in to the market, are smunged together with “gut feeling”, personal bias, pot luck and the occasional slice of political insight, and we end up with the markets’ implied probabilities.
Also importantly, they have a profound effect on party morale. At non-insignificant proportion of the Tories’ feeling of political ascendancy are driven by polls.
So, too right I’m gonna take ‘em seriously.
[Speaking of which, Mr Smithson, one article I would think would be very interesting would be a study of implied probability vs the polls, to see whether the markets are more accurate or less at predicting elections than polls, polls of polls, etc.]
@89:
Ah, he’s one of them sorts of Socialists. My favourite.
The Wright Stuff this morning. Gordon: ‘Leader or Loser’?
Only caught the end - someone saying ‘bumbling idiot’.
How the Dail Mash sees the ‘Economic Crisis’
http://tinyurl.com/6r6frv
re 74. I’m not here to defend YouGov and their whole panel approach seems to defy the whole principle of polling. Earlier in the month I was attacking them on their age weightings - something which you have raised in the past. The result was an admission of error from Peter Kellner and a change.
I am uncomfortable with the way the same people are asked time and time again for their opinions and I fear that might lead to distortions.
They would say, I guess, that this is more than off-set by the vast amount of data they have on each panel member with responses going back over many years.
The problem YouGov critics have over the mayoral race is that their record is so much better than any of the conventional forms of polling. We’ll see a week tomorrow whether that still holds.
O/T HC now favourite on b/fair for Indiana primary.
HC 1.67
OB 2.02
Morning Witan. I read your reply to me on the last thread this am.
All I can say is, ‘Yikes’.
It might be a good idea for the person with their finger on the button to have compulsory MOTs.
re 89. Pot & Kettle - please do not attack other posters in such a personal way.
Now that the backdated stuff appears to only apply to 60-64 year old women, will backbenchers rebel? Is there time for the amendment to be reinserted?
Perhaps Field was too hasty to withdraw his.
Even if they can reinsert the amendment, would they so close to an election?
I was aghast last night to see Nick Palmer defend a sycophantic idiot like Gabble, but I suppose we cannot expect any better from an MP who insisted (on this very site) that ID cards would “pay for themselves”.
@96:
That’s a worrying ha-ha-only-serious article.
“We’re planting crops for fuel instead of food in order to make it cheaper to drive to the shops where we then buy food that is much more expensive because we’ve planted crops for fuel instead of food. You can see where I’m going with this, right?”
In a sentence, that’s everything that’s dangerously, idiotically wrong with biofuels.
89 4homes and 6000 a day?? Is that true?!
84- Actually reading that post reminded me of a friend who worked for Mori. He said the job was so boring, and people so disinterested, that if he got the answer “f*ck off mind you own business” he would still count them randomly choosing his own catagory. Would save the time and bother of asking anyone else.
I knew someone else who worked in a data research company that just made up their data, and sold it on. In public services senior managers are all guilty of fiddling data. Very few get found out
Data gathering is boring and inane. Probably no such thing as a rogue poll mind, just people who are worse at making it all up.
95. I said that soundbite was going to catch on, didn’t I? In 5-10 years time, David Camerons Leader To Loser attack will be right up there with some of Tony Blair’s famous put-downs to John Major.
101. I think they may well go quiet. Its so close to the locals and they look a bit silly now. If they feel duped or resentful it will come out later either over this or something like 42 days.
On 42 days Gordon will feel more comfortable. He will portray himself as tough on terror even if he loses.
The ‘terror for political purposes’ thing Tyson refered to earlier.
106. Perhaps why yougov are pretty accurate ? Someone who will respond to an email for 50p is likely to be the sort of person who leaves the sofa to vote ?
http://adamboulton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/04/men-stabbed-out.html
Jacqui Smith said it was so safe in London……….
106.
I must admit I didn’t see it - thought it was too easy. I thought the ‘only backs down when facing personal defeat’ hit hardest. Too long?…..
48 I was thought Frank Field was pathetic this morning; in the sense of having been done up like kipper, knowing it and not wanting to admit it.
As the sheer complexity and lack of traceability of this ‘package’ becomes clearer poor Frank will feel ever more of a chump.
How many times do Labour MPs have to get conned by the leadership before they realise what’s happening?
104 Perhaps the Conservatives will introduce a Hypocrite Tax.
Where Rich Socialists are taxed until they squeel like pigs.
Gin 106 you did say that and you were spot on. A brilliant phrase, did Hague come up with it?
108- but then with internet voting you have to get the representation right.
If there was a reliable system for ensuring that internet voting was representative then it must be the most reliable- but I think too big an “if.”
There are a number of problems that I have with this theory that the polls systematically over estimate the Labour vote. It is true that in the past this has happened but surely since the pollsters are now aware of this the methodology will compensate for it?
Secondly Labour are now much more unpopular than they have been before and after 10years of opposition it is no longer as embarassing to admit to being a Tory. Surely these two facts together mean that Mike’s rule could well be out of date?
106- GIN- was a copy of Cable’s far more cutting quote. 110- test- blatant plaigarism, not brilliance
111 Gordon has now given Frank Field every reason to resign the Labour whip and sit as an independent. But will he?
@115:
Indeed, it could well be. But we won’t know if it *is* until about 8pm on Friday. Such is polling, a tricky business.
87. so let me get this right. You don’t want people to use the futile spectrum of right and left, in particular attacking the “right” and “far right”, but you do want to take the opportunity to make a few negative generalisations of “leftists” and your pet hates?
The shallowness of Tories’ admiration for Frank Field has really shown itself on the thread today - they loved him for exactly as long as they thought he was useful, and now he’s done something they disagree with they say he’s lost his integrity, he’s a fool, etc. He’s an intelligent Labour MP who expresses independent views and sometimes comes to conclusions that each of us in turn find inconvenient. Get over it.
102: BannedHorse - hey, there I was the other day commending (in slightly amused terms) your moderate stance against an Islamophobe. You’re a hard man to befriend. But my post on the last thread (291, I think) wasn’t actually about Gabble, it was a response to the more serious questions on the thread on what has actually been agreed on the 10p rate. A see a couple of serious responses, too - in reply to the one about identifying the under-65s, I’d have thought the DWP does have date of birth, no? In reply to Socrates on the dangers of over-complication - agreed, but this issue needs to be fixed and you can’t have everything: we’ll just do it as simply as possible (which was my point about usuing the WA mechanism). In reply to Mike L about having had a year to think it out: as someone who did raise this a year ago, I don’t think it’s a secret that the extent of the issue has only recently become generally accepted.
roger, I usually agree with you, but the Federated Union of Contributors Who Identify Themselves (yes, yes, I know) would like to request some restraint in taking the opportunity to biff us personally. I know you have to put up with a lot worse here yourself, though.
Apologies if this has already been covered somewhere; but while filling in the mayoral postal ballot form last night what struck me was how insanely complicated it all was. Four separate pieces of paper (one mayor, two assembly and a T Hamlets council by-election), all with varying voting systems and a less than helpful explanatory leaflet. As a political geek and Westminster village worker I am no stranger to such things, but surely this level of complexity must put off the less committed and/or less bright.
Does this happen? Is there any evidence for this? Is there a large number of spoilt ballots in these elections (such as in Scotland’s elections last year) or does the low turn-out merely reflect the fact that only those who the most committed vote in the first place?
116 But Cable’s Mr Bean line was a rip-off. Not that he ever had the grace to acknowlegde the true author.
73- Nick Cohen- please! Your civil question was incredibly loaded against Ken. What do you expect?
OH, and since BannedHorse has raised it, I do admire Gabble - reading yesterday’s thread was like one of those David Gemmell novels where one gnarled hero with a battered axe in a narrow pass holds off 280,000 tribesmen.
Mike - I thought this business of polls overstating Labour had been dealt with now. If the polls did overstate them in 2005, it was only by a small margin. Who was surprised by the end result apart from Blair?
Further weighting should mean mean than the chances of Labour now being overstated are probably no more than the Tories. As for the next election, turnout could be up by 10% which I reckon could make predictions more difficult.
107 Sky News reported that the Government had delayed the 42 Days vote by a further month, into June. Presumably this is because the business managers don’t want a defeat for Gordon coming soon after the 10p row and possible discontent if local elections and London Mayor are bad news stories for Labour. Shows some sense.
IMHO the biggest weakness this row showed was Gordon mixes up obstinacy with leadership. His refusal to move until last moment and to be truthful about why the position changed and to that he is ever mistaken is at root of many of his problems.
He shouted at the Lobby on the plane returning from USA, telling them there were no losers and it was a got up row from the media. A week later he gave them interviews saying he “got it” and claiming it wasn’t a u turn, had nothing to do with Frank Field’s amendment or possible defeat.
@120:
Nick P, I’m hoping you mean “biff” in the insult sense, rather than the “do sex at” sense. Thought of being biffed by Roger in the latter sense doesn’t bear thinking about.
115. One of the ways pollsters ensure they have an accurate sample is to weight by past voting. Unfortunately Labour voters don’t remember. They say they voted Labour when they voted for someone else or didn’t vote at all. Until they get better memories, current methodology is flawed. Without Mystic Meg, there isn’t much they can do about it.
113. A strap line on a current affairs show is a long way from it catching on. for what it’s worth I don’t think it’s nearly catchy enough to survive beyond today.
111. Kingbongo. Great post of yours the other day about going to Oxford to learn how to teach disruptive kids. By a long way the most interesting post on that thread. I didn’t know you were from Bolton? My favourite restaurant owner in Soho comes from Bolton. She always dresses in black with loads of very loud jewellry. She tells the story of going back home for a funeral and overhearing one of the guests whispering to another “And what does she think she’s come as?”
120. Nah wrong - I like Frank as he has the courage of his convictions - unlike your glorious leader who got you in to this mess with his 2p tax con.
114: Many of the great political soundbites are borrowed, often from someone who borrowed them themselves.
Cameron’s worked at PMQs for the same reason Cable’s did, the public think the same way.
“In reply to Mike L about having had a year to think it out: as someone who did raise this a year ago, I don’t think it’s a secret that the extent of the issue has only recently become generally accepted.” by Nick Palmer MP April 24th, 2008 at 10:13 am
Ahem…..
“Well, we argued the facts to death on yesterday’s thread so I’ll focus on the political impact. Most people are always cynical about politics so I think that the “it’s a con” line will get some traction in the short term, even though I don’t agree with it. On the other hand, the four in five people who find their taxes really have dropped next year will be pleasantly surprised, and the Times is suggesting that this is designed as a preparation for a 2008 election. More subtly, it’s an example of Brown’s ability to seize the initiative, and if we see half a dozen more surprises like this in the next few months I think people will feel they’ve got a genuinely fresh wind in government.” by Nick Palmer MP March 22nd, 2007 at 8:20 am
“Benedict at 44: Child Tax Credit is available well above that level. Moreover, the threshold for getting the full amount of Working Tax Credit *with or without children* is being raised by £1200 over inflation from April 2008 (now £5220, then £6420 plus inflation), and since this is then withdrawn at 37% that change will save people on low earnings over £400. It’s therefore simply not correct that the changes penalise low earners, and perhaps you should correct your blog accordingly?” by Nick Palmer MP March 21st, 2007 at 5:05 pm
Humbug, anyone?
For all brown’s errors on the income tax changes, wouldn’t he be in more trouble if the Tories had consistently opposed the changes. I don’t remember Cameron calling this an outrage last year. Ming Campbell made a fuss about it, but what happened to him?
Nick Cohen mentions the lack of posters.
The main use of a poster is name recognition. Speaking as a former PPC, this is hugely important as you rarely have time or local profile to achieve this person to person. Neither Ken nor Boris needs any work on this, so why waste the money?
The other benefit is making a local area look solid - ‘Winning Here’, etc. - and your party as clearly the flavour of the area, tied to a name no-one has previously heard of.
Also, with such large constituencies - most cover 5 or 6 parliamentary constituencies - it is simply prohibitively expensive to poster the area on behalf of a name no-one knows and is unlikely to know, even after two terms on the GLA - c.f. Merton and Wandsworth GLA member 2000-2008; can you name them?
Come on Roger, if refusing to vote for Ken is a sign of being a closet Tory then we really are in trouble!
120: Nick, like with you, I admire FF when he stands up for the interests of the people Labour was created to help, but feel let down when he bottles.
119 - clearly I was referring to self-claimed leftists like Nick. My comment would not have made sense otherwise - why would someone who does not try to define themselves one one side or another only prescribe positive characteristics to one side? (Hence my use of the phrase “those who define themselves as “left”").
Also, my post was not about generalisation, which I am not particularly opposed to as long as people appreciate there are exceptions. Without generalisations it would be impossible to legislate or to govern.
Logic and critical reasoning - elusive bu**ers, aren’t they?
134. add. I meant ‘expensive’ in terms of time and effort.
Morning all
Re: 75 - I’m not going to bother with a second preference, Lennon. I can’t bring myself to vote for any of the others. Your take on Brian Paddick is the same as mine, I see.
Re London & turnout: Mark has this spot-on. The Outer London boroughs will come out for Boris while the turnout in places like Newham will be poor albeit I’m certain Ken will win here. For that and other reasons, Boris will win.
Interesting to look at the retail sales figures this morning - March was 4.6% up year-on-year which doesn’t seem too bad though it was down 0.4% month-on-month from Feb which has been revised upward as has January. Now, March had Easter but was also cold so should we be surprised at a slight dip in sales ?
To me, it suggests that rumours of the death of consumer confidence seem exaggerated and once again the doom-mongers stand accused of talking us all into recession. Yes, there are serious problems but some of the armageddon scenarios currently look overcooked.
102: “hey, there I was the other day commending (in slightly amused terms) your moderate stance against an Islamophobe.”
Must’ve missed that.
But since a member of Parliament has now testified I’m a moderate — as opposed to, say, a terrorist or common criminal — can I be exempt from having to fork out for an ID card, please?
PS: If Islamophobia so troubles you, stop propping up NeoConservatives.
120 Nick I said he has been deceived. That does not make him a fool. Frank Field is acting honourably.
You maybe ok about your Leader misleading a group of your parties MPs , but I know they will not be. That is the issue.
What did Gordon say to your NEC a month ago?
“no one will be worse off”
129,135. I agree. Apologies To Nick Cohen. Sometimes political shifts by those you think are on the same side are the hardest to take.
The first postal ballots will be opened today, so we may be able to get an informal indication of how things are going.