• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Deleted member 34788

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 29, 2017
3,545
The problem with this is that its a rolling average, it may look similar on a poll of polls like this but not if you isolate the last few days. We're 9 days before the election and the last 10 polls have a con lead of: 12 (newest), 7, 9, 13, 9, 15, 10, 8, 6, 7 - an average of 9.6 and a low of 6. Compare that to the same point in 2017: 6, 3, 6, 10, 12, 4, 6, 7, 14, 12 - an average of 8.0 with a low of 3. In the coming days in 2017 we saw a lot more single figure polls including one showing a 1pt CON lead and another in fact showing a 2pt LAB lead. The 2017 gap continued to close whereas right now it seems to be stalling slightly

The poll of polls really doesn't tell the whole story, last time there was a really large range in polls, with the ones showing a large CON lead bringing up the average. However it turned out the close ones were correct last time, and quite a few of them accurately predicted the 2-3pt lead. This time the close polls are a bit further away and there are fewer of them.


True but that doesn't change the fact that in the last few days they have 51% of young people telling them they won't vote, and that should account for all the people who registered up to a week ago. On that basis their methodology is accurate, they would have to predict a 49% turnout of 18-24 year olds. Of course it is a very small sample in just one poll, but it seems like the big problem is that young people are actually not wanting to turn out on the level of 2017, and these pollsters may be right.

Sure, but we have had big swings in both certainty to vote and how much of a demographic will vote already from other pollsters and surveys. Conistently swinging higheras we need it to be. I've already said the polling is all over the place. But indeed, the situation seems similar to 2 years ago. Records broken in favour of labour and this time remain parties.

With the poll, it seems kantar is an outlier. The metrics do seem the opposite of what they stated.
 

Deleted member 38573

User requested account closure
Banned
Jan 17, 2018
3,902
Polling stations have always been <5 mins from me. I've lived all over the south of England.

Right now it's literally outside my front door.
 

Dirtyshubb

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,555
UK
Hopefully trumps lies about not wanting the NHS won't work for those who would defend the tories no matter what. Especially with stuff like this immediately floating about.
 

CampFreddie

A King's Landing
Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,950
Was it Kantar that had like a 90%+ turnout for 65+, way more than the 2017 election, but then had 18-24 turnout at half of 2017?

Not really. The viral tweet saying "LOL they used 90% turnout" didn't correct for survey weighting and got the wrong answer (it was NOT assuming 90% turnout for 65+) and in their haste to deny any bad polls, no-one bothered to check the calculations.

However, IIRC the actual turnout used was still a little high for pensioners (low 80's, I think) and a bit low for millennials.

I wonder what will happen if we do get a hung parliament. We'll probably end up back at the polls before long and I don't know if Tories or Labour voters will have more "stamina" as we end up in a series of elections until one side can create a majority.
LibDems are probably over if that happens, but Labour would have to do a solid deal with the SNP to form a stable government and would probably lack a majority on "English" issues where Scottish MPs don't get a vote. I'd expect some shenanigans to get around that rule (tagging some national reforms onto mostly-English bills so the SNP can vote on it).
 

Xevross

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,048
Sure, but we have had big swings in both certainty to vote and how much of a demographic will vote already from other pollsters and surveys. Conistently swinging higheras we need it to be. I've already said the polling is all over the place. But indeed, the situation seems similar to 2 years ago. Records broken in favour of labour and this time remain parties.

With the poll, it seems kantar is an outlier. The metrics do seem the opposite of what they stated.
I also just saw in the kantar poll; only 48% of the under 25 correspondants said they are registered to vote. With 34% saying they aren't and 12% don't know (6% prefer not to say). This seems like a high number not being registered to me, so perhaps they didn't get the best sample of under 25s (they only asked 115).

Hopefully we get a new national yougov poll today to go with the london figures, will be good to see an updated MRP.
 

Zaph

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,054
Its so hilariously obvious when trump has been told not to say something - he has the subtlety of a child.
 

Menchi

Member
Oct 28, 2017
3,136
UK
Ian Austin is a horrible thing. He's definitely up there with the other Ian in terms of my unadulterated loathing.
 

Koukalaka

Member
Oct 28, 2017
9,279
Scotland
Not really. The viral tweet saying "LOL they used 90% turnout" didn't correct for survey weighting and got the wrong answer (it was NOT assuming 90% turnout for 65+) and in their haste to deny any bad polls, no-one bothered to check the calculations.

However, IIRC the actual turnout used was still a little high for pensioners (low 80's, I think) and a bit low for millennials.

I wonder what will happen if we do get a hung parliament. We'll probably end up back at the polls before long and I don't know if Tories or Labour voters will have more "stamina" as we end up in a series of elections until one side can create a majority.
LibDems are probably over if that happens, but Labour would have to do a solid deal with the SNP to form a stable government and would probably lack a majority on "English" issues where Scottish MPs don't get a vote. I'd expect some shenanigans to get around that rule (tagging some national reforms onto mostly-English bills so the SNP can vote on it).

Thanks for the clarification. There's nothing to stop EVEL being reversed, right?
 

ronpontelle

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,645
Cant registration be done purely online?
Yeah.

We've registered for postal votes out here in France. I wasn't sure of my status so put a message in with the email and they got back to be the next day saying all was confirmed. Received my postal vote about a week later.

My wife sent her email off the day after I did, and hasn't received a thing. After about a week she sent another email with a copy of the form asking them to confirm receipt, and she's still not received anything - no confirmation email, no human reply, no postal vote... It's shit.
 

Flammable D

Member
Oct 30, 2017
15,205
Yeah we're on holiday from Friday until the day after the election, so while we've both had confirmation, starting to get worried that our postal votes haven't turned up yet. Apparently they can't do anything about missing ones until 5 working days before the election, so given our dates if they don't turn up we're SOOL
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,911
Yeah we're on holiday from Friday until the day after the election, so while we've both had confirmation, starting to get worried that our postal votes haven't turned up yet. Apparently they can't do anything about missing ones until 5 working days before the election, so given our dates if they don't turn up we're SOOL

Too late to get someone to vote on your behalf?
 

Temascos

Member
Oct 27, 2017
12,493
Funnily enough, the vast majority of Ian's I know are absolute arseholes 🤔

Oy, my brother's called Ian! I'll have you know he's a perfectly nice lad! Grr. :P

On that subject he's a civil servant who hates the Tories, hates Labour, voted Brexit but is socially liberal and concerned about climate change, poverty, etc. I have no idea how to sell anything to him and when I do explain stuff he gets annoyed that I'm "labouring the point" across. I get a bit like Rachel Maddow when it comes to explaining things which can put people off I suppose.
 

His Majesty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,165
Belgium
I forgot about him. No doubt he has some awful skeletons in his closet, as all Ians do.
Probably Tory skeletons

645401941123399721.png
 

ruttyboy

Member
Oct 29, 2017
709
Joe have a good video for awareness of US healthcare costs that should hopefully help put things into perspective for many people.

To hold your baby, $40? W.T.F.?!!!

How do they even bill that? What's it for, the labour cost of someone carrying your child 2 feet? The extra 90 seconds you're occupying the room? HOLY SHIT.
 

Dirtyshubb

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,555
UK
To hold your baby, $40? W.T.F.?!!!

How do they even bill that? What's it for, the labour cost of someone carrying your child 2 feet? The extra 90 seconds you're occupying the room? HOLY SHIT.
I remember finding out about that a little while ago and being shocked at how blatant the money grabbing is in the US health system. Absolutely ridiculous.

Almost feels like extortion 'wanna hold your baby? Give us $40' lol
 
OP
OP
Uzzy

Uzzy

Gabe’s little helper
Member
Oct 25, 2017
27,017
Hull, UK


Ooooof. Not what the Tories wanted.


The media coverage over this whole thing has been moronic. They should just ask 'Has the US changed it's policy that foreign drug users should not be subsidised by American citizens paying 'full' price for drugs?' The answer is quite obviously no. So the US will seek to have us pay more for drugs. End of. But rather than look at factual reality, the media just loves to hunt out sound bytes and let everything devolve into a world of 'he said she said' without anyone in the public learning anything.
 

His Majesty

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,165
Belgium
I personally completely and utterly trust Demonic Raab when he says Trump, out of good will, won't increase drug prices for the NHS to make a quick profit.
 

ruttyboy

Member
Oct 29, 2017
709
I remember finding out about that a little while ago and being shocked at how blatant the money grabbing is in the US health system. Absolutely ridiculous.

Almost feels like extortion 'wanna hold your baby? Give us $40' lol
This article clears it up a bit, it's the cost of having another nurse present to watch the baby.

Not that that takes away the madness of the thing, I can't figure out how that invoice ended up at $13k, especially as they've charged for 79 units of 'DELIVERY C SECTION'. Assuming she didn't have 79 kids hiding in there, do they charge by the minute or something?
 

Dirtyshubb

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,555
UK
So far Labour have been handling the NHS stuff really well, straight on any chance they have to show what liars the tories are.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.