Comments on: Ken and Boris neck and neck

By: Joe James Broughton

Joe James Broughton — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 19:16:00 +0000

Mayoral election and Lib Dems – James –

I’d like to believe that a bad performance would damage the LDs generally – but I don’t think it’s really that crucial because they are not expected to win it anyway.

I think Boris can win this and agree with some of Richard’s points – a lot of recognition – but I also think Ken Livingstone will be hard to shift.

By: James

James — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 15:18:21 +0000

There has been much talk about whther a Ken victory would cause embarassment for David Cameron, and perhaps prick the bubble of momentum (if you can prick a bubble of momentum??) that is building behind the Conservatives.

However, I’m more interested in how a disasterous showing by the Lib Dem candidate might damage Nick Clegg. Any thoughts?

By: Richard

Richard — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 19:44:23 +0000

What I am picking up from chats on the street and in the pubs is that Ken Livingstone is seriously tired and well past his “sell-by date”,something of a dinosaur bluntly, while Boris Johnson is young, very clever, and offers new hope for Londoners. The other great plus factor for Boris is that he appeals to the young voters, that notorious band of “no shows” in so many elections, and that must help him to build his majority.

By: Joe James Broughton

Joe James Broughton — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 18:52:25 +0000

Daniel Finkelstein (who I like) predicted that Ken would win the Mayoral election, but it wouldn’t matter (re the Tories).

By: Anthony Wells

Anthony Wells — Thu, 03 Jan 2008 22:15:42 +0000

Mark – you can’t tell the make up of the YouGov panel by looking at the unweighted figures as YouGov samples aren’t randomly selected from the panel, they are quota samples. In other words, the unweighted sample isn’t representative of the panel as a whole.

The large weighting downwards of over 55s means only that more over 55s responded than expected and fewer younger respondents replied than expected (or possibly that too many over 55s were invited, but that’s the same thing really: if too many were invited it would be because the response rate was underestimated).

Its always easy to judge whether weighting on demographics is sufficient – look at the weighted figures and compare them to reality. Political weighting by past vote and things is controversial. Weighting on things like age is incredibly simple and (unless its a universe where the age profile is unknown, like party membership) very difficult to get wrong.