The final Sunday before the election. There should be plenty of polls out tonight (certainly we should see ComRes, YouGov, Deltapoll and Opinium – and perhaps others). I will update this post as they appear, and then round up at the end.

The first to appear is SavantaComRes. Slightly confusingly they have two polls out tonight, conducted using slightly different methods, over different timescale and showing slightly different results.

The first was conducted for RemainUnited, Gina Miller’s anti-Brexit campaign, and was conducted between Monday and Thursday. It has topline figures of CON 42%, LAB 36%, LDEM 11%, BREX 4%. The second was conducted for the Sunday Telegraph, with fieldwork between Wednesday and Thursday. Topline figures there are CON 41%, LAB 33%, LDEM 12%, BREX 3%. Tables for the SavantaComRes/Sunday Telegraph poll are already available here.

The previous ComRes poll was conducted for the Daily Telegraph with fieldwork on Monday and Tuesday, so the RemainUnited poll actually straddles the fieldwork period of both polls. It was also asked a little differently. The most recent two ComRes polls for the Telegraph have prompted people with the specific candidates standing in their constituency (i.e. someone would be asked if they will vote for Bob Smith – Labour, Fred Jones – Conservative, etc, and not be given the option of voting for any party that is not standing in their area). In contrast, it appears that the ComRes poll for RemainUnited was conducted using their previous method, where candidates were just prompted with a list of parties – Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and so on. For some reason, ComRes seem to find a higher level of support for “other others” when they prompt using party names.

Putting that aside, the SavantaComRes poll for the Telegraph earlier in the week had a 10 point Conservative lead. Comparing the two SavantaComRes/Telegraph polls that used the same methodology shows the Tories down 1, Labour up 1. A small narrowing in the lead, but nothing that couldn’t just be noise. I’m expecting a fair number of polls tonight, so we should be in a position to see if there is a consistent trend across the polling companies, rather than getting too excited about any movement in individual polls.

UPDATE1 – Secondly we have Opinium for the Observer. Topline voting intention figures there are CON 46%(nc), LAB 31%(nc), LDEM 13%(nc), BREX 2%(nc). Fieldwork was conducted between Wednesday and Friday and the changes are from a week ago. There is obviously no movement at all in support for the main parties here. The fifteen point Tory lead looks daunting, but it’s worth bearing in mind that Opinium have tended to show the largest Conservative leads during the campaign.

UPDATE2: The weekly YouGov poll for the Sunday Times has topline figures of CON 43%(+1), LAB 33%(nc), LDEM 13%(+1), BREX 3%(-1). Fieldwork was Thursday and Friday, and changes are from their midweek poll for the Times and Sky. Again, no significant change here. YouGov’s last four polls have had the Tory lead at 11, 9, 9 and 10 points, so pretty steady.

Finally (at least, as far as I’m aware) there is Deltapoll in the Mail on Sunday. Changes are from last week. Their topline figures are CON 44%(-1), LAB 33%(+1), LDEM 11%(-4), BREX 3%(nc). A slight narrowing there, leaving the Conservative lead at 11, but again, nothing that couldn’t just be noise.

Looking at the four companies who’ve released GB opinion polls for the Sunday papers, we’ve got ComRes and Deltapoll showing things narrowing by a little, YouGov showing the lead growing by a point, Opinium showing no movement. The clear trend towards Labour we were seeing earlier in the campaign appears to have petered out. The average across the four is a Conservative lead of 11 points, though of course, these are tilted towards those pollsters who show bigger Conservative leads. Taking an average of the most recent poll from all ten pollsters producing regular figures gives an average of 10 points.


2,060 Responses to “Sunday polls – as they are published”

1 23 24 25 26 27 42
  1. Dr Moderate now calling a minority Labour government. Not sure I believe it but the figures and thinking look sound. Can anyone win in a country that is split 52 48 on the big issue.

  2. BFR,

    Good post – and now the election is all over bar the shouting, we can get back to discussing brexit. I’ve been thinking about the economic consequences for some time and here is my first attempt at writing a post.

    You said:

    • In that context, I expect the spending taps to be turned on, with tax cuts, more into the NHS, etc for a couple of years. All of the recent deficit reductions will be reversed, and more.

    However, that will be the wrong response to the economic situation. This is because the restriction of trade is a totally different kind of crisis to the financial crises we are now used to.

    A financial crisis (as in 2008) is “negative demand shock” which means that domestic demand is suddenly lower than optimum. This can be solved by the government spending more to increase domestic demand, if politics allows (usually there are conservatives who try to stop it).

    Brexit – assuming the hard variety – is a “negative supply shock”, which means that the productive capacity of the economy is suddenly damaged. Factories and commerce can no longer deliver goods to other countries to the (legally guaranteed) specification, price and timescale that they want.
    The surplus capacity can not be redirected to the local economy because it is either producing too much or is only part of European production (e.g. a car engine, aircraft wings).
    The effect is similar to the oil price shock of the 1970s (when the key input, oil, because harder to obtain) or the result of a war in which factories and commerce are bombed flat.

    The immediate result of a negative supply shock is that domestic demand is *too high*. People want to continue buy imported goods but the exports are not there to pay for it. And worse, the falling inward investment does not cover the balance.

    By the way, all this was spelt out by Adam Posen two years ago.
    https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/drawbridge-economics-the-brexit-reality-check-is-coming

    So continuing the thought process, it is not possible to buy your way out of the situation by increasing government spending. This increases domestic demand, which will be already too high after brexit. What will be needed is a painful adjustment to a lower standard of living. Exactly who has to adjust is the key question, and one I will ponder in a future post.

  3. Alec

    Yes, happy to wait and see.

    I actually tend to share David Carrod’s view that these stories will have little effect on the average voter.

  4. Sedgefield revisited (post Ashworth)

    From Gina’s MRP and assuming same turnout as GE’17 then (votes, %)

    CON: 17,884 (43%)
    LAB: 18,300 (44%)
    LDEM: 1,664 (4%)
    BXP: 2,911 (7%)
    Green: 832 (2%)
    ind: 0 (0%)

    Total: 41,591 (turnout 65.1%, up 3.5% on GE’17)

    I’d pointed out that we just need 500 BXP to vote CON in order to help ensure we have a Leave majority but I wasn’t clear on the LAB-Leave issue so I’ll show the maths

    CON: 17,884 (43.5%)
    LAB: 17,800 (43.3%)
    LDEM: 1,664 (4.0%)
    BXP: 2,911 (7.1%)
    Green: 832 (2.0%)

    Total 41,091 (turnout 64.3% which is still above every GE since 1997, when a young Tony Blair won in Sedgefield)

    So LAB-Leave don’t actually have to vote for CON they can just abstain. If they did actually for CON then obviously only need 250 extra.

    PS YG MRP v1 is similar to Gina v2. Only difference is both parties having squeezed a bit more from their respective “little sister” since then. EC show CON winning the seat but a whole bunch of seats that LAB will probably keep due to BXP splitting the Leave vote (ie Leave tactical voting could gain CON 5+ more seats in NE.England beyond the 2-3 probables)

    I know we shouldn’t use %s tied to MRP but everyone seems to do that anyway. However, given the higher than expected CON gains in Gina v2 I’m going to revise up my YG MRP number from 345 to 355 (ie very close to v1).

    NB That will be BAD news for CON, where “Complacent CON” is still a very real risk. It would be much better for Boris if folks thought it would be very close and the only way to stop PM Corbyn is to ensure they vote CON (or SCON where applicable)

  5. Apologies for long post. It amounts to an argument that polls tend to understate changes. You can now skip!

    There is a very wide variation in the results produced by the various pollsters. Some tend consistently to make the Tory lead greater than others. Clearly their various methodological choices make a considerable difference. They can’t all be right. Could there are also be a problem that they all share and which might tend to bias their results in one direction or another?

    One difficulty might be that they underestimate trends. Most companies now seem to have panels of respondents. (Part of my difficulty in making this analysis is that my knowledge of how polling companies operate is very, very sketchy but I think previous sentence is right). To judge from the likelihood to vote figures, people on these panels are more interested in politics than others. It follows, I suspect, that they are more likely to hold strongly to a particular point of view and be reluctant to change it (a characteristic they share with posters on UKPR). It follows that changes that may be occurring in the wider population of less committed voters will appear more slowly and in a more muted form on polls relying on panels. Similarly the likelihood to vote (among say ‘leavers) predicted by polls will be greater than that predicted by MrsMath from her observations of the Lincolnshire voter.

    A second feature which may make panel based predictions ‘conservative’ with a small C is that those polled may be reluctant to confess to past voting behaviour which no longer fits their beliefs. You Gov apparently found evidence that people who said they voted Labour in 2017 (or was it 15 or even the referendum?) later said that they had not done so. The effect of this would be to enhance the predictive power of ‘previous labour vote’ and disguise a shift that had taken place. You Gov failed to find evidence of such behaviour on the part of Conservative voters and so did not correct for it. This failure, however, may reflect the lack of change among conservatives at that point. It they later became more fickle this ‘false recall’ behaviour will tend to downplay any change from the status quo.

    Two final points occur to me that may again downplay change. The first is that companies may begin the task of getting representative samples by using algorithms that select a sample likely to match their requirements. Insofar as they fail to do this they can then use weighting to give it the required characteristics. Now suppose that one group (say leavers) have become reluctant to confess this behaviour or find the task of answering questions relating to it upsetting. They will then not take part in the poll and the company will need to go on to others in order to try and get their quota. Two things will then occur both of which will have a conservative (with a small C) effect. First the company will go back to the ‘usual suspects’ more often than it should (I read some LSE blog that suggested that the chance of being selected for a YouGov sample was very strongly related to the way you voted) and second, insofar as it still fails to get enough, it will use weighting to make the result conform to the earlier situation,

    The similar point is that the companies will under-represent those who signed up very recently and who, having taken the trouble to do so, will probably vote. Given that these people have not voted before their introduction is a chance for a new result. Under-representing them is going do reduce the extent of apparent change.

    None of this actually suggests the nature of the change. My guess is that in this election these characteristics of polls downplay Labour’s chances as a) the slow trend is in their favour and I have argued that polls will underplay changes and b) the one Yougov poll at which I looked in detail had a suspiciously low number of leavers in its unweighted sample. Others more diligent than I can check if this is generally true of YouGov – it’s not true of all polls.

    Actually using these data to work out what is really going on seems to me a mammoth task. And even if one could do this, it would still not have taken account of tactical voting. Do people vote in individual constituencies in a way essentially predicted by past vote, age and regional swing? I have given up on the evidence and taken to following Cambridgecol The Trevors are looking at the evidence, although I find their conclusions dispiriting. Anyone else like to have a go?

  6. Many thanks for the replies, including a considered one from the Trevs.

    Just a few things that struck me from them:

    – There seems to an assumption amongst some that the pendulum will automatically swing back; history (not in the UK but elsewhere) suggests that it is possible for the pendulum to be captured and retained at the top of its swing by a combination of populism, a tilted electoral playing field and a cooperative media.

    It’s also possible that the failure of a party to deliver can bring a lurch to a more extreme version rather than a reversion to the centre; in fact the Overton window can be moved wholesale. For example Berlusconi’s failed right-wing populist government was followed by the even more extreme 5 Star and the Northern League…

    I am not so sanguine that the pendulum will automatically swing… nor that its destination (if it does) will be a good one for the UK

    – The Trevs contend that once Brexit is done then politics will revert to normal; I think this is dangerously complacent.

    In my opinion identity politics is here to stay – people are voting on emotional attachment rather than policy or logic, and they will not revert back.

    The route to future political success will be based in developing, accepting and riding populist memes, often propagated on-line or in the print media; the political extremes are far better at doing this than the centre, and it is far easier for the extremes to present easy solutions to complex problems.

    Put simply, IMHO in this era the route to political success is far harder for rationalists…

    – regards the success or otherwise of Brexit, Trevs, we will simply have to agree to differ. I GENUINELY hope that you are right, as I have no desire to see the UK people suffer.

    I will be more than happy to admit it if I am wrong, but I will be staggered if it turns out well. I anticipate a slow, steady decline into economic weakness and global political irrelevance for our country.

    All of which will exacerbate the seething frustration of those already abandoned, angry and fearful people and communities that voted for Brexit (I appreciate some people like ToH voted Brexit for very positive reasons, but those are not the people I am talking about here…)

  7. @ ALEC – “You have long held than a benefit from getting out of the EU was to escape ANY restrictions on states aid, arguing that WTO terms allow much more flexibility in this regard”

    NOPE!

    Key “WRONG” word highlighted.

    You even point out why when you correctly say WTO terms would be more flexible (ie we would still be bound to SOME restrictions). I absolutely do not want to escape ANY restrictions for the reason I pointed and will repeat – without ANY restrictions then a future Marxist govt could just renationalise everything that couldn’t Leave.UK, that would IMO be catastrophic to UK’s competitiveness. I’m happy to see a slightly greater role for the state but not the kind of state that McDonnell wants.

    Perhaps you never actually read my posts and like PTRP and others just project your own opinion. Whatever. zzz ZZZ

  8. I see Dr Moderate has now accepted my correction to his correction:

    “On balance, removing the imputed EU VI for people turning 18 in my original analysis is reasonable.

    This also avoids a ‘double counting’ scenario with new voter registrations.

    Removing this imputed VI means the reduction in the Con lead is now -1.4% (down from -2.4%).”

  9. @TOH – me too, although with the proviso that they can sometimes make voters consider an issue that is more favourable to one party or another.

    Mrs A tends to be a good judge of these things. On seeing the Leeds hospital video (of Johnson) her comment was not about the state of the NHS – ‘we all know it’s sh!te under the Tories’ was her delightfully concise comment.

    No – Mrs A was aghast at the look of a PM taking a journalists ‘phone, and the look of utter embarrassment and caught out naughty child when the journalist described his actions.

    The impact here, Mrs A thinks, is less the facts around the NHS, but far more around judgements of just how arrogant and odious Mr Johnson is.

    If she is correct, if anything, it was more serious for Cons than a simple NHS in crisis story.

  10. Charles

    I admire your perseverance re the polls.

    My only bit of advice is this GE is difficult to predict given the number of D/K, the only answer at this late stage is take a deep breath relax and wait for the result early Friday morning.
    Then you will either be ecstatic or depressed or both if it’s a hung Parliament and all the pondering over the polls won’t mean a thing, at least not to the next GE.

  11. @charles

    I think the interesting thing is that the polling companies do have quite a range of approaches – Mori doesn’t weight to past vote at all, YouGov and Opinium largely use past vote statements from the time of the past vote to guard against false recall, others just ask and hope false recall doesn’t break the result too much.

    But there isn’t a big difference between the companies as to the result – they’re all hovering around Con 43 Lab 33, give or take a couple of percent. Even Opinium/Survation, posting the highest Con leads, and ICM/Comres posting the lowest, are within margin of error [1] of that figure. So that doesn’t mean that they’re accurate, but I think if they’re wrong the *reason* for that will probably be something new that hasn’t been considered yet.

    [1] Note: the individual polling companies have been fairly internally consistent, so I don’t believe the difference between them is primarily margin of error due to random sampling – it’s more likely to be design, sampling and weighting issues. But none of them are particularly far apart.

  12. MIKE N
    @Fred
    “However how bad are things on the labour side, when a hung parliament would be considered as having conquered Everest”

    I presume there should be a ? at the end, like so? ;)

    I think it’s realistic based on polls to predict Lab will have fewer MPs than Con.

    Yes.

    If I can make a neutral observation, I can’t think of a previous election where there are so many variables, that it would be silly to discount any possible result however improbable.

  13. Good afternoon all from a damp and blustery Auld Reekie capital of Scotland.

    The view from my mini secondment desk is actually quite stunning, in fact very dramatic. Very few urban views can boast looking onto sheer cliffs with a big castle lumped on top of them.

    Ok moving on….

    3 things of interest in this election… How big will Labour’s defeat be? How bad the Lib/Dems will do and will the SNP make any gains?

    My hunch is the Tories majority will be between 30 to 40, the Lib/Dems will make a couple of gains (very poor showing) and of course the big elephant in the room from a Scottish perspective, will the SNP make any gains?

    I’ve had a look back at the Scottish only polls for Westminster and also had a look at Scot goes Pop website and to be honest I can’t make head nor tail what’s going on in Scotland.

    It’s certain the SNP will be the biggest party but I’m not so sure they will make any gains from the Tories as they are polling near 30%.

    My guess is the SNP will win around 37 seats with a vote share of 38%.

  14. OK @Trevs – I can accept your last post. My mistake.

    You once again evade addressing the issue though:

    Do you accept that UK wide industrial policy after Brexit under Johnson’s WA will be subject to EU States Aid rule, and thus control via ECJ and EU case law.

    A simple yes or no would be handy, and then we can put this to bed.

    I feel certain we can agree on this, as you seem to have given up trying to argue against the proposition.

  15. Well a fascinating election to come. Seems the best Labour could hope for is a hung parliament and some sort of minority Gvt with a low single figure majority at best, which to me sounds like a serious recipe for not getting much done at all next year, but we shall see!

  16. @ Turk

    If you don’t like discussing polls then maybe you are on the wrong forum.

  17. CB:

    Well done for keeping going with your leafletting despite the weather. It`s certainly not been kind up here in NE Scotland, and another delivery to our door has just arrived from a LibDem worker struggling in the rain. Our leaflet heap is now 20 plus, with SLAB the least.

    But December elections cause many other knock-on problems, One of our town`s 2 polling stations is the church hall next to the church. So normal events in the hall have to stop and the church office cannot function. The church cannot be used for funerals and for our local academy preparing for their Xmas concert.

    The academy, one of the best public-sector schools in Scotland, doesn’t have a hall big enough for concerts, and the church affair is a much-needed chance for some pupils to gain confidence in public performing .

    Shifting church use isn`t easy, when not only the academy but the two local primary schools have end-of-term services booked next week.

    Put simply, many folk here are detesting this election and do not want another December one.

  18. @Trevs – PS – Good example of the kind of problem we could face:

    Lets say HMG want to initiate a policy to boost the UK shipbuilding sector, and announce a fund for the sector that provides (let’s say) up to £1m over three years for re equipping shipyards.

    As this would be over de minimis levels, and if it was available to Harland & Wolf in NI (if they are still there by then) then the UK would need to submit the proposals to the EC for approval. Failure to do so would lead to legal action in UK courts, who would be legally bound to apply EU law, and could result in the recipient companies (whether in UK or NI) being ordered to repay the funding.

    The alternative would be to exclude any company based in NI.

    Can you offer me any suggestions of how would would deal with this under the Johnson WA?

  19. Alec
    Mrs D’s reaction was the same, and she was so angry that it became the first political thing she has ever shared on Facebook.

    I can’t quite see her getting so incensed by Jonathan A saying he doesn’t think they are going to win and doesn’t much like Corbyn, to suggest equivalence as some here are attempting is to miss the point of why one has the potential to move undecided votes and the other is just tumbleweed.

  20. @Fred
    “If I can make a neutral observation, I can’t think of a previous election where there are so many variables, that it would be silly to discount any possible result however improbable.”

    This GE feels different to GE2017, and feels much like GEs that the Tories won in the ’80s.
    I have a sense of deja vu…that i will wake up on Friday to the news of a(nother) large Tory majority. (I hated those Fridays during the ’80s.)

  21. @ BFR – “The Trevs contend that once Brexit is done then politics will HOPEFULLY revert to normal”

    Adding the word you missed when you paraphrased my comments ;)

    I expect LAB will drop the 2nd ref once we’ve left as they know how toxic it would be to any hope they have of recovering seats lost in the Red Wall. However, if LDEM start to pull VI from LAB again then who knows? Also possible EC-EU27 are a bit “naughty” and suggest we can still Remain (via Rejoin with all our old vetoes and rebates, etc) – I fully expect them to make the future relationships talks very difficult and slip those kind of comments in so as to weaken UK’s hand.

    Thought i’d better add that explanation.

    So I’m prepared to predict (with probability estimates) what I can (eg the maths in HoC votes in last and next parliament) but I don’t have a time machine or crystal ball to see everything and you’d be a fool to predict very uncertain issues. Suggest plausible scenarios, YES. Caste iron predictions – NO.

    I’d also suggest “normal” might be a bit ambitious. A “new normal” along the “old” division then YES, probably, but Boris’s “One Nation” Conservatism will IMO ride the pendulum back to “centre” so we’ll have a Centre party v a FLoC party (unless someone like Long Bailey can move post-Corbyn LAB back from the extreme).

    NB I’m fully prepared to accept I’m possibly be a bit n4ive (glass 52% full) but having won many more seats in North/Midland/Wales then the “One Nation” has 2 dimensions. See COLIN’s reply for the normal use of the term (ie a country of opportunity for all, where wealth creation (and the taxes it then pays) are encouraged not despised).

    The other dimension relates to the Union. NI will be a bit more “special” and post this GE then I’ll be back to hoping Scotland becomes Independent BUT Boris will have to keep most/all of the seats he wins in the “Red Wall” if he wants a 2nd term. That aspect covers the need to END the “London-centric” model that has been in place for decades (under both LAB and CON govts)

    If Boris doesn’t tackle both dimensions of the “One Nation” conservatism then he will lose in GE’24 – and he will deserve to lose (I might even vote LAB, bit far off so TBC)

  22. TURK
    Greetings from a rather chilly early morning in Texas waiting for our new tractor to arrive ,yes that’s how exciting my life gets these days.
    _____________

    I share your excitement. I often tap into the North Korean state run Youtube channel to watch my pal Kim Jung Un presenting new tractors to well managed community farms.

    Yesterday the dear Leader presented( workers against imperialism farm) with a cutting edge Massey/Tafe MF 1035 Standard Tractor.

    Woooff!! They trampled over them spuds like demented urchins to get a photo with my ol pal Kim….Such fanfare…

  23. @ ALEC – We’ve gone over this. You again answer your own question. With regards to you’re example then YES:

    “The alternative would be to exclude any company based in NI”

    NI can have “different types” of help – and they get a HUGE amount of help already but I’ve never once said NI would have EXACTLY the same status as GB – they’re “Special” as in “Special Status”

    If you want to agree with what I’ve said all along then fine. There is no BINGO or GOTCHA here. I fully accept Boris WAB is different to May’s – better IMO but respect Foster and others would see it differently.

  24. It seems evident that widespread tactical voting will occur this GE.

    A question…if the GE exit poll indicates VI of, say, C43, L36, LD 10, how can Prof Curtice etc accurately forecast the effects across E, W and S seats?

  25. Folks have made their minds up on Boris and Corbyn (both “marmite”, although Corbyn more toxic of the two – see opinion polling to check)

    The issue now is GOTV – get your team’s vote out on Thurs and hope the other team are less able to get their voters out.

    Hence, if anything at all has an impact at this stage it is probably the latter issue. Given the nose pinching that we know will happen on Thurs then some folks might prefer just to abstain than back the “less bad” option.

    In some seats then that will be enough (see Sedgefield “Leave” example from earlier – some Remain options as well of course)

  26. @Trevs – “@ ALEC – We’ve gone over this. You again answer your own question. With regards to you’re example then YES:”

    Glad we now agree, but no – you have never once conceded that UK policy will be subject to EU rules and ECJ oversight.

    That is something new, and pretty devastating for a Brexit supporter, I would have said. It’s an admission that in one very significant area that covers a huge range of policy (including tax, etc – see Annex 5) we are not leaving the EU, and unlike our existing EU membership – which we can leave – we will never be able to leave, because it is locked into an international treaty that cannot be broken.

    I am really wondering why people like you and @TOH are still supporting Johnson?

  27. @ MIKE N – Prof Curtice’s exit poll examines a few seats in high detail and uses that as a “projection” for whole of GB

    FWIU the seats he picks are not disclosed and might change to suit the “issues” of each GE.

    However, for sure, Tactical Voting at a seat level is by it’s very nature hard to predict. His approach might miss that effect.

    Also note his “central” prediction will have a confidence range around it.

    Hopefully someone can expand on the above points (ie more detail on Prof.C’s approach, number and type of seats, confidence range, etc)

  28. By the way folks – I appreciate that most of you skip by discussions between myself and the @Trevs on matters of states aid and treaty analysis, but that last one has reached a historic end of epic proportions.

    It really is highly significant.

  29. I’m with BFR. Things once broken don’t mend themselves, and this applies in politics too (Let’s call it the 2nd Law of Politicodynamics).

    Just look at the United States. It took over a century from the Civil War for the Dixie states to be anything but solid Democrat in all bar presidential elections.

    We’ve had a political civil war here, based on identity. There won’t be any “forgive and forget” on either side. Lets just hope it remains a political war, and not the other sort.

  30. @ ALEC – Whatever, you clearly haven’t read or understood anything.

    Disagree with yourself if you like. I’m OK[1] with the deal from a GB perspective. A little sad Foster “over reacted” but a decision had to be made and she made her own bed by refusing to back May’s deal (which was “better” for her than Boris’s deal)

    [1] I expect you’ve forgotten the dozens of times I’ve said Boris’s deal is not perfect but IMO and from my perspective then it is better than May’s deal and better than ignoring the result of the ref.

    I’d personally still prefer a “No WA” Brexit and who knows if we get a badly hung parliament (or ERG hold the balance and the Spartans won’t to risk it) then maybe we get the “default” on 31Jan’20.

  31. Alec
    I do read most of your posts, but skip/skim some.

    Absolutely fascinated that you have revealed to a trenchant Brexiteer that his notion/concept of Brexit under Johnson is inaccurate.

    Probably too late in the day now to change the GE outcome…

  32. @MikeN

    Broadly the exit poll is taken from the polling data to the seat prediction by something similar to the Yougov MRP model. Being an exit poll makes it easier to get the data it requires, however, without a lot of the sampling issues a pre-election poll has – they don’t, for example, have to ask “how likely do you think you are to vote?” and try to predict turnout from that. So they can generally get a bit more reliable result that way.

    Their expectation is that – if nothing goes wrong – they’ll be within 20 seats of the actual result with the initial 10pm call. As seats are formally declared during the night, that will give them further information to revise the estimates for the remaining ones.

  33. Miserable Old Git: …. We’ve had a political civil war here, based on identity. There won’t be any “forgive and forget” on either side. Lets just hope it remains a political war, and not the other sort.

    We “have had”? It’s over? I think it is ongoing and moreover it will continue until there is some kind of reset event.

  34. @Trevs
    “FWIU the seats he picks are not disclosed and might change to suit the “issues” of each GE.”

    I imagine most if not all marginals?

  35. Allen Christie.

    I think you would get a visit from the C.I.A if you were watching North Korean TV. However in the U.K. with a Corbyn lead government it might be compulsory viewing.

    As your an aficionado of tractors the one that we have brought is a John Deere 8345R a mere snip at 220,000 bucks but at least it’s got a radio.

  36. @CIM
    Thanks.

  37. @CIM Thanks for information on what the polling companies do. Very useful.

    In terms of differences between them I think that we are agreed that they are ‘real’ and not just sampling error. I think that the range you are talking about is the range of their averages whose variances will be much less than those for individual polls, so I doubt that they are all within ‘MOE’ but whatever.

    My suggestion is that all polls will tend to understate trends and changes. I am not sure if this is something that has been suggested before or if you agree with it.

    @Turk – thanks for advice – You are a seasoned campaigner and I will try and respect it! Problem is that I tend to turn things that upset me (like the likely outcome) into intellectual problems – not an appropriate or effective tactic!

  38. Here’s a more detailed explanation of how the exit poll has worked

    https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/statistics/staff/academic-research/firth/exit-poll-explainer/

    The 2019 one is going to be the same sort of thing again, but the number of polling places surveyed is increasing from ~120 to ~145 because of the expected increase in volatility.

  39. @Trevs
    Happy to accept the correction re your hope of the Tory’s reversion to a genuine ‘one-nation’ approach, and I appreciate your further explanation; it is my expectation that you will be disappointed, for two reasons:

    1) As a general principle, history suggests that the normalising of living life by belief rather than by rational thinking cannot easily be reversed; the Enlightenment was hard won, and each manifestation of a strongly-held belief system, whether political (Communism, Fascism) or religious, has required a huge struggle to tame – in some cases a struggle which is not yet over. So I feel a simple reversion in voter behaviour is very unlikely.

    2) At a more parochial level, Johnson has a long, long track record of promising, failing to deliver and then claiming success anyway.

    We can go through lists from the Garden Bridge, opposing Heathrow expansion, negotiating the Brexit WA under May, ditching the NI Unionists, dying in a ditch rather than extending, re-badging the EU’s original offer to May and claiming it as a success, 40 new hospitals that turn out to be six at best, no checks on goods entering NI…. the list just goes on and on.

    While there is a remote possibility that Johnson will swing to genuine one-nation Tory values, and an even more remote possibility that his party’s funders and MPs will go along with that (despite it being counter to their wishes and beliefs), I simply don’t rate his chances of actually delivering it – he’s just too idle, has too poor a team, and too little capacity to deal with too many problems.

    For balance, I don’t think Corbyn or Swinson would find it easy either (and Corbyn would bring his own economic problems to add in to the mix) – but they wouldn’t approach it with that toxic combination of flippancy, lack of focus and sense of entitlement that Johnson does.

  40. @ Alec
    “By the way folks – I appreciate that most of you skip by discussions between myself and the @Trevs on matters of states aid and treaty analysis, but that last one has reached a historic end of epic proportions.”

    I never read T. Warne’s posts, nor yrs when they refer to his. I am glad you have reached an epic & historic ending, & may I add it is probably an epochal and indeed a monumental moment.

    Could you summarise in say 15 lines what you have been arguing about. I have always assumed that in trading with the EU in future we will be subject to certain conditions, ones which in future we will have no control over.
    In that sense we have become a client or vassal state to use the language of those often referred to as “nxtters”

    .

  41. oh what the hell here is my punt! cons 335 lab 230 libs 20 scots 42 p/c 3 green 1 speaker 1 dup 8 sf 7 sdlp 2 alliance 1. personally I’m grimly hoping for a hung parliament and that the progressives can negotiate some kind of loose and temperate arrangement.

  42. Security

    I could not care less about the issue of Corbyn & security. I would worry more about having a gaffe-prone PM who needed several minders at the FO to prevent him precipating disaster. & then this G. Williamson fellow, who was sacked on suspicion he had leaked state secrets?
    Now he is in Education perhaps he will be leaking exam papers to GCSE students in an attempt to improve school league tables.

  43. Charles

    Yours is a view I respect I’ve read a number of your posts and although I would disagree with some of your conclusions they are usually well thought out and interesting to read.

  44. Sturgeon’s tactical error exposed:

    “she appealed to voters to lend the SNP their votes, adding: “People understand that this election is not going to decide the issue of independence.”

    Boris would be proud of that kind of BS.

    Sturgeon decided to turn the GE into a ref on Indy – a huge “gift” to SCON who had nothing else before she made that bonkers mistake.

    In Scotland then the GE is:

    SNP: “YES – maybe no longer NOW as that didn’t go down well and I hope the maybe-later folks are st00pid”

    versus SCON: “NO – at least not for a generation”

    PS Folks maybe missed my admission of temporary hypocrisy on Indy. Not going through it all again but it’s a “sequencing issue”. Vote.Leave1 has to be delivered before Vote.Leave2. Holyrood’21 will IMO be the chance for Scotland to give a new Scottish govt a fresh mandate to negotiate a ‘Tartan Divorce’ (no need for a ref – Swinson’s “gift” was to show that a GE can provide a democratic mandate – provided you win that mandate of course!)

  45. @Trevs – “@ ALEC – Whatever, you clearly haven’t read or understood anything.”

    Well I did understand all those posts when you told us that the UK was leaving the EU whole and intact and there was no border down the Irish Sea, no checks, etc etc.

    Now you’ve retreated to the position that the deal is good for GB. Most of what you have previously said about the GB/NI position was thereby false, as you didn’t understand what the WA entails.

    Politically, while most English nationalists will care little for NI, in the long term, I suspect Johnson’s deal will prove toxic for the Conservatives.

    When the realisation dawns that either NI will be getting inferior treatment, or the UK has to subject it’s policies to the EU, I think the impact on Cons won’t be good.

  46. @CIM
    Thanks for link. Still some scope for error, such as bad weather afflicting some parts of the UK worse than other parts this Thursday. There are also the student vote, which seems to me a new phenomenon, and the potential for extreme TV.

    I shall wait for Prof Curtice’s prediction and the head to bed either elated or dejected.

  47. @Hal
    I agree with your economic analysis, which you have put far more clearly than i could.

    However I would argue that what the UK SHOULD do and what it WILL do are different things.

    I fully expect the Tories to try to spend their way out of a 2020/21 slump/recession, resulting in (to your comment above) worsening BoP, rapidly widening budget deficit (to answer the Trevs, not quite the 10% of 2010, but the range 5-7.5% feels about right).

    At that point they will be forced to take demand out of the economy, which I would expect them to do through VAT hikes and further spending cuts, on benefits, overseas aid, farming subsidies and NHS charging regimes for example.

    Two or three years of virtually no pay rises with some FX-induced inflation, increased unemployment (or employment switched from higher paid work to low paid/zero-hours activities) and some benefit and subsidy cuts will see the pain shared amongst most groups; except pensioners, who (as in 2010 – 2019) will be protected through the triple lock as they are the Tory’s key voting constituency.

    That would be my guess anyway…

  48. @Robbiealive – “Could you summarise in say 15 lines what you have been arguing about.”

    The @Trevs (and Johnson, et al) have argued that the UK leaves the EU as one, and that there is no border in the Irish Sea.
    Article 10 and Annex 5 of the N Irish Protocol in the WA show that NI will remain subject to EU States Aid rules forever. Such matters are determined by the EC, with ECJ having the final say.
    This means that, after Brexit, any industrial support policy that applies to the UK must adhere to States Aid rules, now, and under any future changes. HMG would have to submit such proposals to the EC for their approval prior to operation. This would be subject to ECJ oversight, as any matters of EU law inerpretation under the WA are referred to the ECJ.
    The alternative option for the UK is to have separate indistrial policies for GB and NI, if they wish to initiate policies that breech State Aid rules. If this were to happen, the Joint Committee under the WA would require greater checks on goods leaving GB for NI. The @Trevs now accept this, after previously arguing the oposite.

  49. Danny
    “You are saying people just accept dying in corridors instead of publicly complaining. If you do complain, you must be hoping some politicians will take up your cause and do something. How else will the problem be prevented?”

    I’m not saying that at all. If I had felt the need to complain, I would have complained to the hospital. Not everything is about politics. As it was I was just gvery grateful that they saved my life.
    —————————
    CiM
    “Their expectation is that – if nothing goes wrong – they’ll be within 20 seats of the actual result with the initial 10pm call.”

    I seem to remember that the exit polls have been pretty accurate the last few times. This time though, a MOE of 20 seats could mean anything from a Corbyn-led coalition to a small Tory majority. All to play for!
    ———————————
    Charles
    “My suggestion is that all polls will tend to understate trends and changes”

    I agree with that. You made a very cogent argument in an earlier post.

  50. ROBBIE ALIVE.
    Wet and stormy here.

    I think that many voters do, indeed, care less about national security and are worried about the instincts of Corbyn and team, due to his attacks on Bevin’s creation- NATO, his associations with various groups in his past and his ambivalence with regard to defending allies.

    Big vote loser that approach is- IMHO.

1 23 24 25 26 27 42