Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In late April the Tory data chief, Jim Messina, told senior To

SystemSystem Posts: 3,967
edited December 5 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » In late April the Tory data chief, Jim Messina, told senior Tories that his modelling pointed to a CON majority of 290

I’m just back in the UK after my holiday on the West Coast of the US visiting my son, Robert, and his family who have moved to LA from London in July.

Read the full story here


«134567

Comments

  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 8,494
    First, Like Cons.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 8,896
    Second like Cons
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 808
    But the real question is, have we learned anything? Are we going to go into the next election saying "Well, UK polls just aren't that accurate ( https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/uk-election-hung-parliament/ ), we really don't know", or are we going to have even more complex, overfit, subjective, myopic rules of thumb that will lead us to make predictions with just as much unfounded certainty?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 8,896
    Mr Messina had clearly been reading the early campaign comment threads on PB.
  • DanSmithDanSmith Posts: 1,063

    But the real question is, have we learned anything? Are we going to go into the next election saying "Well, UK polls just aren't that accurate ( https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/uk-election-hung-parliament/ ), we really don't know", or are we going to have even more complex, overfit, subjective, myopic rules of thumb that will lead us to make predictions with just as much unfounded certainty?

    Hopefully the polling companies will give us the raw data with appropriate margins of error attached. Trying to guess turnout by demographic is a mug's game really which introduces far too many inaccuracies.
  • PongPong Posts: 4,544
    edited December 5

    But the real question is, have we learned anything? Are we going to go into the next election saying "Well, UK polls just aren't that accurate ( https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/uk-election-hung-parliament/ ), we really don't know", or are we going to have even more complex, overfit, subjective, myopic rules of thumb that will lead us to make predictions with just as much unfounded certainty?

    I do hope so.

    Laying overconfidence is how I make money on this political betting thingy.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 808
    DanSmith said:

    But the real question is, have we learned anything? Are we going to go into the next election saying "Well, UK polls just aren't that accurate ( https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/uk-election-hung-parliament/ ), we really don't know", or are we going to have even more complex, overfit, subjective, myopic rules of thumb that will lead us to make predictions with just as much unfounded certainty?

    Hopefully the polling companies will give us the raw data with appropriate margins of error attached. Trying to guess turnout by demographic is a mug's game really which introduces far too many inaccuracies.
    Interesting idea. I wonder if they would have correctly estimated the margins of error. I suspect that a polling company that offers incorrect certainty will be more financially successful than one that offers correct uncertainty.
  • StereotomyStereotomy Posts: 808
    Pong said:

    But the real question is, have we learned anything? Are we going to go into the next election saying "Well, UK polls just aren't that accurate ( https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/uk-election-hung-parliament/ ), we really don't know", or are we going to have even more complex, overfit, subjective, myopic rules of thumb that will lead us to make predictions with just as much unfounded certainty?

    I do hope so.

    Laying overconfidence is how I make money on this political betting thingy.
    Yeah, after the last election I pretty much decided that's probably the best strategy.
  • Mrs May really did shit the bed.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,167
    Pong said:

    But the real question is, have we learned anything? Are we going to go into the next election saying "Well, UK polls just aren't that accurate ( https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/uk-election-hung-parliament/ ), we really don't know", or are we going to have even more complex, overfit, subjective, myopic rules of thumb that will lead us to make predictions with just as much unfounded certainty?

    I do hope so.

    Laying overconfidence is how I make money on this political betting thingy.
    If the Tories had won 470 seats my 393 sell spread bet would have looked pretty sick.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 1,123
    Labour were certainly putting effort into seats that were won by 5-figure majorities right up to and including polling day. I live in a safe seat - members in my area were sent to a neighbouring Labour-held seat with a small majority. As polling day approached it was clear from canvassing returns that we were home and dry. I suggested we should go to another nearby seat with a Tory majority in the hundreds. But this was ruled out - we had to stick with the targeting strategy laid down at the start of the campaign when we were 20 points behind.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 449
    Its a classic example of the self denying prophecy in politics: by predicting something will happen, people turn out to stop it, and thus the opposite happens. People predicted a huge Tory majority, and t people voted to stop it. This even happened in 1983: Thatcher was expected to win so big that her percentage fell two points from 44% to 42%.

    Now we are going to have 4 and a half years of phrophecies that Jeremy Corbyn will be PM. Do not be surprised if the self denying prophecy strikes again............
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 15,422
    He's not the Messina. He's a very naughty boy.
  • To be fair to Jim Messina and CTF had the general election been held then the result would have been close to this.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 8,896
    Not really Nostradamus though, was it?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 3,546

    To be fair to Jim Messina and CTF had the general election been held then the result would have been close to this.

    *might* have been.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 36,073
    This was all pre dementia tax and ending free school lunches and the triple lock etc and the Tories kamikaze manifesto
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 36,073
    edited December 5
    Davis tells JRM regulatory divergence not a red line https://mobile.twitter.com/tnewtondunn/status/938030575969030144
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 3,546
    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 41,925

    To be fair to Jim Messina and CTF had the general election been held then the result would have been close to this.

    Ruth Davidson showed what could have been for May with a good campaign.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,642
    470 seats. Does anyone know which seats would have had to be won at the margins for that kind of total?
    I know Blyth Valley was one mentioned...
  • HYUFD said:

    This was all pre dementia tax and ending free school lunches and the triple lock etc and the Tories kamikaze manifesto

    Be fair. If you think you're on course for a majority of 704 there isn't a problem making "difficult decisions" like this.

    And this is my ongoing defence to Jezbollah worshippers on the campaign targeting - "had we ignored the polls we could have won more seats". Perhaps. Had everyone ignored the polls the Tories wouldn't have come over so overconfident and smarmy putting those seats within reach. Swings and roundabouts.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 25,253
    edited December 5
    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    I get the premise of the "proof of work" concept that underlies the crypto-currency / securing the blockchain, but I always think what huge divergence of resources which could instead be analyzing data for things like cures for cancer.
  • dixiedean said:

    470 seats. Does anyone know which seats would have had to be won at the margins for that kind of total?
    I know Blyth Valley was one mentioned...

    The entirety of this list

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
  • Pulpstar said:

    To be fair to Jim Messina and CTF had the general election been held then the result would have been close to this.

    Ruth Davidson showed what could have been for May with a good campaign.
    Indeed.
  • Phew, Mike's back in the UK and editing PB.

    Nothing much will happen in the world of politics, we can all put our feet up and focus on Christmas instead.
  • ' Although this inevitably got ratcheted down as the campaign progressed the view throughout the seven weeks that an increased majority was a certainty had a totally adverse impact on Conservative thinking. Quite simply it skewed the party’s whole management of the election and approach to seat targeting. '

    It wasn't targetting the likes of Bolsover and Don Valley where the Conservatives went wrong - they achieved big increases in vote and by far their best ever totals there.

    It was that the Conservatives had no idea what was happening in London and studenty areas. Nor did Labour or for that matter, most PB anecdotes or JackW and his team of experts
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,105

    dixiedean said:

    470 seats. Does anyone know which seats would have had to be won at the margins for that kind of total?
    I know Blyth Valley was one mentioned...

    The entirety of this list

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
    69. Don Valley Yorkshire and the Humber 5,169 5.62%

    Nice.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,642

    dixiedean said:

    470 seats. Does anyone know which seats would have had to be won at the margins for that kind of total?
    I know Blyth Valley was one mentioned...

    The entirety of this list

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
    Thanks. Look at that list and marvel... Tooting, Hemsworth, etc, etc.
    Insane to even contemplate.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 16,963
    Welcome back, Mike. It's been a bit quiet while you were away.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,315
    edited December 5

    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    I get the premise of the "proof of work" concept that underlies the crypto-currency / securing the blockchain, but I always think what huge divergence of resources which could instead be analyzing data for things like cures for cancer.
    What's worse with bitcoin is that it's almost entirely given up on being a useful payment system. There was always a ponzi-like money game on top of the useful system, but the ponzi has eaten the useful part. The result is that these resources are being burned to allow people to invest thinking they'll make a profit, but since it creates no value and burns all these resources to boot, profits can only come from other people's losses, and the average investor is mathematically guaranteed to lose more than they put in.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,477
    edited December 5

    dixiedean said:

    470 seats. Does anyone know which seats would have had to be won at the margins for that kind of total?
    I know Blyth Valley was one mentioned...

    The entirety of this list

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
    Plus a few more . Norwich South would have gone Tory on Messinas's forecast.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 15,422

    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    I get the premise of the "proof of work" concept that underlies the crypto-currency / securing the blockchain, but I always think what huge divergence of resources which could instead be analyzing data for things like cures for cancer.
    What's worse with bitcoin is that it's almost entirely given up on being a useful payment systen. There was always a ponzi-like money game on top of the useful system, but the ponzi has eaten the useful part. The result is that these resources are being burned to allow people to invest thinking they'll make a profit, but since it creates no value and burns all these resources to boot, profits can only come from other people's losses, and the average investor is mathematically guaranteed to lose more than they put in.
    I read that Bitcoin mining is now consuming more power than the whole of Ireland. It seems like a huge waste of resources.
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 713

    dixiedean said:

    470 seats. Does anyone know which seats would have had to be won at the margins for that kind of total?
    I know Blyth Valley was one mentioned...

    The entirety of this list

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
    How things sometimes change, especially in London. In 2010, the number 150 on that list, Tooting, was one of the Tories real targets, and they fell about 2,500 votes short.

    They actually wonthe number 145 target in 2010 - Ealing Central and Acton - by coming up towards a 4,000 vote majority (nearly 8% majority).
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,315
    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    Ethereum does have a plan to stop having to do this (proof-of-stake instead of proof-of-work) but unfortunately it's taking a while to get the design right.
  • ' In 2016, the UK’s net worth rose by £803 billion from 2015, an increase of 8.9%. This is the largest recorded annual increase and the largest percentage increase since 2004. '

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/uksectoraccounts/bulletins/nationalbalancesheet/2017estimates

    As I've pointed out previously people with defined contribution pensions have been doing very well (even if they didn't know it):

    ' The value of the households sector increased by £750 billion in 2016, making it the greatest contributor to the change in UK net worth. Insurance, pension and standardised guarantee schemes rose by £348 billion, with £319 billion of this coming from pension schemes. Much of this increase is due to revaluations of insurance and pensions, which has a significant effect because of the size of the asset in the households sector. '

    Rather puts the 'fishfingers to go up by 5p' stories into perspective.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 10,366
    stevef said:

    Its a classic example of the self denying prophecy in politics: by predicting something will happen, people turn out to stop it, and thus the opposite happens. People predicted a huge Tory majority, and t people voted to stop it. This even happened in 1983: Thatcher was expected to win so big that her percentage fell two points from 44% to 42%.

    Now we are going to have 4 and a half years of phrophecies that Jeremy Corbyn will be PM. Do not be surprised if the self denying prophecy strikes again............

    I suspect that the number of voters that turned out to specifically thwart Messina would be in the single numbers.
  • dixiedean said:

    470 seats. Does anyone know which seats would have had to be won at the margins for that kind of total?
    I know Blyth Valley was one mentioned...

    The entirety of this list

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
    How things sometimes change, especially in London. In 2010, the number 150 on that list, Tooting, was one of the Tories real targets, and they fell about 2,500 votes short.

    They actually wonthe number 145 target in 2010 - Ealing Central and Acton - by coming up towards a 4,000 vote majority (nearly 8% majority).
    I know for a fact with days to go, the Tories were hoping to take Tooting and that Labour flooded the seat with activists worried they might lose it.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,105

    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    I get the premise of the "proof of work" concept that underlies the crypto-currency / securing the blockchain, but I always think what huge divergence of resources which could instead be analyzing data for things like cures for cancer.
    What's worse with bitcoin is that it's almost entirely given up on being a useful payment systen. There was always a ponzi-like money game on top of the useful system, but the ponzi has eaten the useful part. The result is that these resources are being burned to allow people to invest thinking they'll make a profit, but since it creates no value and burns all these resources to boot, profits can only come from other people's losses, and the average investor is mathematically guaranteed to lose more than they put in.
    I read that Bitcoin mining is now consuming more power than the whole of Ireland. It seems like a huge waste of resources.
    To put these figures in some context, Digiconomist suggests Visa's payment systems uses the energy equivalent of 50,000 US households to run 350 million transactions, while bitcoin uses the energy equivalent of 2.8 million US households to run 350,000 transactions on a good day — in short, Visa does more with less.

    http://www.wired.co.uk/article/how-much-energy-does-bitcoin-mining-really-use
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 13,386
    edited December 5
    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,315
    edited December 5

    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    I get the premise of the "proof of work" concept that underlies the crypto-currency / securing the blockchain, but I always think what huge divergence of resources which could instead be analyzing data for things like cures for cancer.
    What's worse with bitcoin is that it's almost entirely given up on being a useful payment systen. There was always a ponzi-like money game on top of the useful system, but the ponzi has eaten the useful part. The result is that these resources are being burned to allow people to invest thinking they'll make a profit, but since it creates no value and burns all these resources to boot, profits can only come from other people's losses, and the average investor is mathematically guaranteed to lose more than they put in.
    I read that Bitcoin mining is now consuming more power than the whole of Ireland. It seems like a huge waste of resources.
    To put these figures in some context, Digiconomist suggests Visa's payment systems uses the energy equivalent of 50,000 US households to run 350 million transactions, while bitcoin uses the energy equivalent of 2.8 million US households to run 350,000 transactions on a good day — in short, Visa does more with less.

    http://www.wired.co.uk/article/how-much-energy-does-bitcoin-mining-really-use
    Although unlike Ethereum, Visa can't send kittens.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 16,963

    ' In 2016, the UK’s net worth rose by £803 billion from 2015, an increase of 8.9%. This is the largest recorded annual increase and the largest percentage increase since 2004. '

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/uksectoraccounts/bulletins/nationalbalancesheet/2017estimates

    As I've pointed out previously people with defined contribution pensions have been doing very well (even if they didn't know it):

    ' The value of the households sector increased by £750 billion in 2016, making it the greatest contributor to the change in UK net worth. Insurance, pension and standardised guarantee schemes rose by £348 billion, with £319 billion of this coming from pension schemes. Much of this increase is due to revaluations of insurance and pensions, which has a significant effect because of the size of the asset in the households sector. '

    Rather puts the 'fishfingers to go up by 5p' stories into perspective.

    True, but it's nominal wealth which (except for a small number of people who happen to harvest it at just the right time) might be just a blip on a price chart.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,105
    edited December 5

    dixiedean said:

    470 seats. Does anyone know which seats would have had to be won at the margins for that kind of total?
    I know Blyth Valley was one mentioned...

    The entirety of this list

    http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
    How things sometimes change, especially in London. In 2010, the number 150 on that list, Tooting, was one of the Tories real targets, and they fell about 2,500 votes short.

    They actually wonthe number 145 target in 2010 - Ealing Central and Acton - by coming up towards a 4,000 vote majority (nearly 8% majority).
    I know for a fact with days to go, the Tories were hoping to take Tooting and that Labour flooded the seat with activists worried they might lose it.
    London (and similar places) was the real confounding factor. Being engaged directly in Don Valley, I didn't have time to read much of pb (or other inferior analysis) or indeed bet.

    But I said at the time that the canvassing in Don Valley was only squarable with the national polling if we were being slaughtered in London: yet both parties were acting as if that wasn't the case (see e.g. Ruth Cadbury in that documentary).
  • I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Calling the election was a good idea.

    Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 756

    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    Ethereum does have a plan to stop having to do this (proof-of-stake instead of proof-of-work) but unfortunately it's taking a while to get the design right.
    For anyone who's interested, this is the best critique of the proof of stake model I have read.

    https://medium.com/@tuurdemeester/critique-of-buterins-a-proof-of-stake-design-philosophy-49fc9ebb36c6

    The point of bitcoin is to provide security and it's not a given that proof of stake is as secure as proof of work, nor will it ever be.

    Posters comparing the energy costs to the cost of Visa transactions, etc, are missing the point. Visa can, and do, cancel cards on a whim. Banks can, and do, freeze accounts and assets and allow governments to seize funds. None of this is possible with bitcoin. That is its value.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,315

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Agree, the problem wasn't calling the election, it was what she did when she'd called it.
  • Tissue_PriceTissue_Price Posts: 7,105

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    I still think she was right to go for the election. In hindsight going even earlier would have been better.

    "I am conscious that I have only been elected by Conservative MPs. Although that is how our constitution works, I want to give the British people the chance to give their approval - both for my leadership and our plan to trigger Article 50."
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,642

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Not necessarily wrong to call an election.
    Wrong to assume that it was in the bag and refuse to turn up to debates or engage with the public. And to forbid senior Cabinet Ministers from the airwaves. And to generally run a negative piss poor campaign.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 2,899
    A majority of 290? I remember a poll during the 1997 campaign saying that Tone would get a majority of 190 and that was mind blowing. 290! Why did we think that Theresa could possibly reach those sort of stratospheric heights?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,485
    You've certainly made the precis interesting. Sounds like the voters expected a walk-over and preferred May's majority to be less overwhelming but they overdid it. Without polls I'm sure May would have got her 150 majority.
  • A majority of 290? I remember a poll during the 1997 campaign saying that Tone would get a majority of 190 and that was mind blowing. 290! Why did we think that Theresa could possibly reach those sort of stratospheric heights?

    It was polling like this that made the Tories think they'd slaughter Labour (plus remember the Copeland by election)

    http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2017/02/21/fifty-shades-of-grey-voters-corbyns-punishing-polling-with-older-voters/
  • A few days ago it was the Republic of Ireland going to veto our progress. Today its Northern Ireland via the minority partner in the government. With friends like these...
  • RogerRoger Posts: 8,485
    Is Jim Messina selling the Big Issue?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 16,963
    Roger said:

    You've certainly made the precis interesting. Sounds like the voters expected a walk-over and preferred May's majority to be less overwhelming but they overdid it. ..

    Yep, it was the 'You were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!' election.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 36,073

    HYUFD said:

    This was all pre dementia tax and ending free school lunches and the triple lock etc and the Tories kamikaze manifesto

    Be fair. If you think you're on course for a majority of 704 there isn't a problem making "difficult decisions" like this.

    And this is my ongoing defence to Jezbollah worshippers on the campaign targeting - "had we ignored the polls we could have won more seats". Perhaps. Had everyone ignored the polls the Tories wouldn't have come over so overconfident and smarmy putting those seats within reach. Swings and roundabouts.
    May wanted to use a big majority to take unpopular decisions and put them in her manifesto to ensure she had a mandate for them, the voters therefore decided if she lost her majority she would have no mandate to implement them and acted accordingly especially with Corbyn offering free ice cream and soda for all but the very rich.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,768
    It was apparent at the time that the Conservatives' hubris was leading them to target unrealistic seats. It was less apparent that Labour's defeatism was leading them to fail to target realistic seats.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 8,315
    edited December 5
    kyf_100 said:

    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    Ethereum does have a plan to stop having to do this (proof-of-stake instead of proof-of-work) but unfortunately it's taking a while to get the design right.
    For anyone who's interested, this is the best critique of the proof of stake model I have read.

    https://medium.com/@tuurdemeester/critique-of-buterins-a-proof-of-stake-design-philosophy-49fc9ebb36c6
    There are legitimate criticisms of proof-of-stake but this article is drivel, don't waste your time reading it. Seriously, it's a non-technical person trying to paraphrase things he's heard and misunderstood.
    kyf_100 said:


    The point of bitcoin is to provide security and it's not a given that proof of stake is as secure as proof of work, nor will it ever be.

    Posters comparing the energy costs to the cost of Visa transactions, etc, are missing the point. Visa can, and do, cancel cards on a whim. Banks can, and do, freeze accounts and assets and allow governments to seize funds. None of this is possible with bitcoin. That is its value.

    Bitcoins can be frozen by two friendly Chinese guys called Jihan Wu and Wang Chun. But its true that they haven't done this kind of thing to date, they're nice people.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 13,386

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Calling the election was a good idea.

    Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
    I agree. But i also think that there is something in what Rochdale Pioneers was saying. If you feel you are on course for such a massive majority then isn't that exactly the time to put stuff into the manifesto that everyone agrees should be done but no one has the courage to do. Trying to do something to address the issues of late life care and age inequality is only really sometjing the Tories could go for if they thought thay could afford to upset a few vested interests amongst their own supporters.

    One of the problems with the election result is that it makes these problems even more intractable.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 8,896

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Calling the election was a good idea.

    Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
    I agree. But i also think that there is something in what Rochdale Pioneers was saying. If you feel you are on course for such a massive majority then isn't that exactly the time to put stuff into the manifesto that everyone agrees should be done but no one has the courage to do. Trying to do something to address the issues of late life care and age inequality is only really sometjing the Tories could go for if they thought thay could afford to upset a few vested interests amongst their own supporters.

    One of the problems with the election result is that it makes these problems even more intractable.
    Abandoning the policy a day or two later was at least as much of an issue as the policy itself. Especially if your campaign slogan is 'strong and stable'.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,768

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Calling the election was a good idea.

    Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
    I agree. But i also think that there is something in what Rochdale Pioneers was saying. If you feel you are on course for such a massive majority then isn't that exactly the time to put stuff into the manifesto that everyone agrees should be done but no one has the courage to do. Trying to do something to address the issues of late life care and age inequality is only really sometjing the Tories could go for if they thought thay could afford to upset a few vested interests amongst their own supporters.

    One of the problems with the election result is that it makes these problems even more intractable.
    The Conservative manifesto should have consisted of one word: Brexit. It was their vote winner. Everything else was going to lose votes.

    Since Parliament was always going to be dominated by Brexit anyway, putting other stuff in was worse than pointless.
  • I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Calling the election was a good idea.

    Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
    I agree. But i also think that there is something in what Rochdale Pioneers was saying. If you feel you are on course for such a massive majority then isn't that exactly the time to put stuff into the manifesto that everyone agrees should be done but no one has the courage to do. Trying to do something to address the issues of late life care and age inequality is only really sometjing the Tories could go for if they thought thay could afford to upset a few vested interests amongst their own supporters.

    One of the problems with the election result is that it makes these problems even more intractable.
    What Mrs May should have done, and I said here on the time, with those proposals she should have said 'we appoint a (Royal) Commission to look into this and implement their suggestions' without going into specifics.

    It would have given her enough wiggle room to implement those policies and not upset her voters weeks before they go to the ballot box.
  • One thing that probably had an effect was Messina and CTF were spot on in 2015.

    I think they predicted 329 seats in 2015 (versus the 330 they actually got) so it might have been overconfidence from that.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 756

    kyf_100 said:

    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    Ethereum does have a plan to stop having to do this (proof-of-stake instead of proof-of-work) but unfortunately it's taking a while to get the design right.
    For anyone who's interested, this is the best critique of the proof of stake model I have read.

    https://medium.com/@tuurdemeester/critique-of-buterins-a-proof-of-stake-design-philosophy-49fc9ebb36c6
    There are legitimate criticisms of proof-of-stake but this article is drivel, don't waste your time reading it. Seriously, it's a non-technical person trying to paraphrase things he's heard and misunderstood.
    kyf_100 said:


    The point of bitcoin is to provide security and it's not a given that proof of stake is as secure as proof of work, nor will it ever be.

    Posters comparing the energy costs to the cost of Visa transactions, etc, are missing the point. Visa can, and do, cancel cards on a whim. Banks can, and do, freeze accounts and assets and allow governments to seize funds. None of this is possible with bitcoin. That is its value.

    Bitcoins can be frozen by two friendly Chinese guys called Jihan Wu and Wang Chun. But its true that they haven't done this kind of thing to date.
    Tuur is one of the most respected and well connected writers in the crypto space. If you think that article is drivel, it would be interesting to hear why.

    With regards to Jihan Wu, he took his best shot at it last month on the weekend of the 12th, and failed. Chain death spiral ain't gonna happen.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 41,925
    edited December 5

    It was apparent at the time that the Conservatives' hubris was leading them to target unrealistic seats. It was less apparent that Labour's defeatism was leading them to fail to target realistic seats.

    But where to target ?

    It was a very difficult election to get that right - Take the East Midlands..

    In Ashfield the Tories are now within 1,000 , whereas High Peak is over 2,300 votes away ! Not sure even Rogerdamus could have predicted that one.

    Not entirely leave/remain broken either - again why did the Tories take Mansfield, come close in Ashfield but up in the NorthEast get walloped in Hartlepool which on any model (Even accounting for differential leave/remain swing) goes blue before Ashfield.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 1,642
    Meanwhile DD is arguing the difference between alignment and convergence. Dancing on a pinhead stuff.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 36,073

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Calling the election was a good idea.

    Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
    I agree. But i also think that there is something in what Rochdale Pioneers was saying. If you feel you are on course for such a massive majority then isn't that exactly the time to put stuff into the manifesto that everyone agrees should be done but no one has the courage to do. Trying to do something to address the issues of late life care and age inequality is only really sometjing the Tories could go for if they thought thay could afford to upset a few vested interests amongst their own supporters.

    One of the problems with the election result is that it makes these problems even more intractable.
    The Conservative manifesto should have consisted of one word: Brexit. It was their vote winner. Everything else was going to lose votes.

    Since Parliament was always going to be dominated by Brexit anyway, putting other stuff in was worse than pointless.
    Exactly, Thatcher's 1983 campaign was focused on one word: Falklands with nothing controversial in the manifesto itself while Foot offered 'the longest suicide note in history'
  • dixiedean said:

    Meanwhile DD is arguing the difference between alignment and convergence. Dancing on a pinhead stuff.

    It's all very 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 16,963

    dixiedean said:

    Meanwhile DD is arguing the difference between alignment and convergence. Dancing on a pinhead stuff.

    It's all very 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'
    Hang on, did I miss some major new development?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 36,073
    Roger said:

    Is Jim Messina selling the Big Issue?

    He ran the data for the Obama 2012 and Cameron 2015 campaigns so I would imagine not, fortunately for him 2017 was not his first campaign
  • I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Well, Richard, it is just about possible there are still some politicians around who put the interests of the country ahead of the party, and even themselves. I wouldn't count TM amongst them though.

    She got what she deserved.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 36,073

    dixiedean said:

    Meanwhile DD is arguing the difference between alignment and convergence. Dancing on a pinhead stuff.

    It's all very 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'
    DD looks vaguely like Clinton in a slightly more brownbeaten way
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 16,963

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Well, Richard, it is just about possible there are still some politicians around who put the interests of the country ahead of the party, and even themselves. I wouldn't count TM amongst them though.

    She got what she deserved.
    No, you are wrong abut that. She would absolutely put the interests of the country ahead of the party or herself. Unfortunately she's just not very good at the politics required for any of the three.
  • HYUFD said:

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Calling the election was a good idea.

    Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
    I agree. But i also think that there is something in what Rochdale Pioneers was saying. If you feel you are on course for such a massive majority then isn't that exactly the time to put stuff into the manifesto that everyone agrees should be done but no one has the courage to do. Trying to do something to address the issues of late life care and age inequality is only really sometjing the Tories could go for if they thought thay could afford to upset a few vested interests amongst their own supporters.

    One of the problems with the election result is that it makes these problems even more intractable.
    The Conservative manifesto should have consisted of one word: Brexit. It was their vote winner. Everything else was going to lose votes.

    Since Parliament was always going to be dominated by Brexit anyway, putting other stuff in was worse than pointless.
    Exactly, Thatcher's 1983 campaign was focused on one word: Falklands with nothing controversial in the manifesto itself while Foot offered 'the longest suicide note in history'
    Oh come of it, the Falklands were mentioned just three times in the manifesto whereas she was proposing privatisation and trade union reforms to name two, at the time, controversial things in the manifesto.
  • dixiedean said:

    Meanwhile DD is arguing the difference between alignment and convergence. Dancing on a pinhead stuff.

    It's all very 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'
    Hang on, did I miss some major new development?
    Arlene Foster screwed David Davis, over Brexit.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,768
    Pulpstar said:

    It was apparent at the time that the Conservatives' hubris was leading them to target unrealistic seats. It was less apparent that Labour's defeatism was leading them to fail to target realistic seats.

    But where to target ?

    It was a very difficult election to get that right - Take the East Midlands..

    In Ashfield the Tories are now within 1,000 , whereas High Peak is over 2,300 votes away ! Not sure even Rogerdamus could have predicted that one.

    Not entirely leave/remain broken either - again why did the Tories take Mansfield, come close in Ashfield but up in the NorthEast get walloped in Hartlepool which on any model (Even accounting for differential leave/remain swing) goes blue before Ashfield.
    I take that point. But the Conservatives could probably have set aside their reported efforts in Barnsley East, Bolsover and West Bromwich East before pondering their options too much more deeply.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 17,768

    dixiedean said:

    Meanwhile DD is arguing the difference between alignment and convergence. Dancing on a pinhead stuff.

    It's all very 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'
    Hang on, did I miss some major new development?
    Arlene Foster screwed David Davis, over Brexit.
    In Northern Ireland with a copy of the Good Friday Agreement?

    Cluedo has come on in leaps and bounds since my childhood.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,477

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Well, Richard, it is just about possible there are still some politicians around who put the interests of the country ahead of the party, and even themselves. I wouldn't count TM amongst them though.

    She got what she deserved.
    I agree with that. As a non- Tory I did have a lot of respect for TM as someone who appeared to play politics with a straight bat. When she called the election contradicting so many of her earlier utterances, all of that disappeared - and she revealed herself to be just as calculating and untrustworthy as Cameron and Blair.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 13,386

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Well, Richard, it is just about possible there are still some politicians around who put the interests of the country ahead of the party, and even themselves. I wouldn't count TM amongst them though.

    She got what she deserved.
    Practically every politician I have ever known or seen has believed that what is in their best interests must also be in the best interests of the country.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 15,422
    edited December 5

    dixiedean said:

    Meanwhile DD is arguing the difference between alignment and convergence. Dancing on a pinhead stuff.

    It's all very 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'
    Hang on, did I miss some major new development?
    Arlene Foster screwed David Davis, over Brexit.
    As she put it to Damian Green, "You must think I was porn yesterday."
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 36,073

    HYUFD said:

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Calling the election was a good idea.

    Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
    I agree. But i also think that there is something in what Rochdale Pioneers was saying. If you feel you are on course for such a massive majority then isn't that exactly the time to put stuff into the manifesto that everyone agrees should be done but no one has the courage to do. Trying to do something to address the issues of late life care and age inequality is only really sometjing the Tories could go for if they thought thay could afford to upset a few vested interests amongst their own supporters.

    One of the problems with the election result is that it makes these problems even more intractable.
    The Conservative manifesto should have consisted of one word: Brexit. It was their vote winner. Everything else was going to lose votes.

    Since Parliament was always going to be dominated by Brexit anyway, putting other stuff in was worse than pointless.
    Exactly, Thatcher's 1983 campaign was focused on one word: Falklands with nothing controversial in the manifesto itself while Foot offered 'the longest suicide note in history'
    Oh come of it, the Falklands were mentioned just three times in the manifesto whereas she was proposing privatisation and trade union reforms to name two, at the time, controversial things in the manifesto.
    Nothing which would offend her own supporters or potential supporters rather than those already voting Labour
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 5,190
    edited December 5
    Don't normally follow the Parliament TV channel, but very interesting Urgent Question to David Davis on Brexit question. My takeaways:

    Labour are VERY on message about staying in the Single Market and Customs Union. First time I have seen unity on their Brexit position.

    The Conservatives apart from the usual headbanger suspects and Anna Soubry don't wan't to talk about Brexit. It's an uncomfortable subject for them and the few middle roaders that turned up are concerned about it.

    And, most interestingly, David Davis is going for Single Market and Customs Union - In All But Name. The UK will emphatically not join the SM+CU according to Mr Davis' hints. But it will replicate them.

  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 865

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Personally, it was the TV pictures of the numbers turning up to see and listen to Corbyn at the many mass meetings that he held. It was at least to my mind, obvious that a sea change was happening. While in comparison, when May tried similar tactics, she had to try and arrange her supporters around her to make it look like large crowds, and failed. Sorry, but you just can't buy the support and the enthusiasm for Corbyn is getting, even now, when the press are still trying to ignore him.

    So why were the polls, and particularly the internal party polls so wrong before the GE? Increasingly, because they are only asking their own supporters. Telephone and internet polls are tedious and boring, while street and door2door pollsters are easily ignored or abused, while the weighting of the results to increase the accuracy reminds me more of the acronym GIGO, garbage in, garbage out. Really, who is going to waste their time answering lots of questions, unless they feel they can influence the results?

    And all that, before I even mention my suspicion that some of the parties are intentionally rigging the polls by making sure their own supporters flood them.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 16,963
    justin124 said:

    I agree with that. As a non- Tory I did have a lot of respect for TM as someone who appeared to play politics with a straight bat. When she called the election contradicting so many of her earlier utterances, all of that disappeared - and she revealed herself to be just as calculating and untrustworthy as Cameron and Blair.

    A politician can (and indeed should) be calculating, to further what he or she perceives as the interests of the country.

    Theresa May's problem is that she's not calculating enough, or at least that she calculates wrongly. In particular, she seems often to assume that the situation will remain static whilst she decides what to do, failing to anticipate how others will move in the meantime. So she keeps getting caught out.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,477

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Calling the election was a good idea.

    Running the worst campaign in living memory with policies to upset your key demographics, not such a good idea.
    I agree. But i also think that there is something in what Rochdale Pioneers was saying. If you feel you are on course for such a massive majority then isn't that exactly the time to put stuff into the manifesto that everyone agrees should be done but no one has the courage to do. Trying to do something to address the issues of late life care and age inequality is only really sometjing the Tories could go for if they thought thay could afford to upset a few vested interests amongst their own supporters.

    One of the problems with the election result is that it makes these problems even more intractable.
    The Conservative manifesto should have consisted of one word: Brexit. It was their vote winner. Everything else was going to lose votes.

    Since Parliament was always going to be dominated by Brexit anyway, putting other stuff in was worse than pointless.
    The problem with that is that the electorate was interested in other issues - such as Austerity etc. Labour quite understandably refused to focus on Brexit - which was always a highly technical issue for most people.Like Ted Heath before her in February 1974, Theresa May found out the hard way that whilst a PM might wish to call an election on a particular issue, the electorate - and the other parties - may wish to debate other things.
  • VerulamiusVerulamius Posts: 716
    European success!

    We are finally out of the excess deficit procedure as our deficit has fallen below the 3% Maastricht limit.

    http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/12/05/uk-s-deficit-back-below-3percent-of-gdp-council-closes-procedure/
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 8,837
    Pulpstar said:

    To be fair to Jim Messina and CTF had the general election been held then the result would have been close to this.

    Ruth Davidson showed what could have been for May with a good campaign.
    Not really. Conditions in Scotland were unique.
  • stevefstevef Posts: 449
    OchEye said:

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Personally, it was the TV pictures of the numbers turning up to see and listen to Corbyn at the many mass meetings that he held. It was at least to my mind, obvious that a sea change was happening. While in comparison, when May tried similar tactics, she had to try and arrange her supporters around her to make it look like large crowds, and failed. Sorry, but you just can't buy the support and the enthusiasm for Corbyn is getting, even now, when the press are still trying to ignore him.

    So why were the polls, and particularly the internal party polls so wrong before the GE? Increasingly, because they are only asking their own supporters. Telephone and internet polls are tedious and boring, while street and door2door pollsters are easily ignored or abused, while the weighting of the results to increase the accuracy reminds me more of the acronym GIGO, garbage in, garbage out. Really, who is going to waste their time answering lots of questions, unless they feel they can influence the results?

    And all that, before I even mention my suspicion that some of the parties are intentionally rigging the polls by making sure their own supporters flood them.
    The polls were not wrong. They were self denying. People voted to stop what the polls were accurately predicting.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,477

    justin124 said:

    I agree with that. As a non- Tory I did have a lot of respect for TM as someone who appeared to play politics with a straight bat. When she called the election contradicting so many of her earlier utterances, all of that disappeared - and she revealed herself to be just as calculating and untrustworthy as Cameron and Blair.

    A politician can (and indeed should) be calculating, to further what he or she perceives as the interests of the country.

    Theresa May's problem is that she's not calculating enough, or at least that she calculates wrongly. In particular, she seems often to assume that the situation will remain static whilst she decides what to do, failing to anticipate how others will move in the meantime. So she keeps getting caught out.
    Her earlier words came back to haunt her. Thereafter, she would not be believed or given the benefit of the doubt.No longer did she seem 'straight' or more trustworthy than other politicians - yet that had been one of her selling points prior to calling the election. She effectively trashed her own brand .
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 36,073
    OchEye said:

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Personally, it was the TV pictures of the numbers turning up to see and listen to Corbyn at the many mass meetings that he held. It was at least to my mind, obvious that a sea change was happening. While in comparison, when May tried similar tactics, she had to try and arrange her supporters around her to make it look like large crowds, and failed. Sorry, but you just can't buy the support and the enthusiasm for Corbyn is getting, even now, when the press are still trying to ignore him.

    So why were the polls, and particularly the internal party polls so wrong before the GE? Increasingly, because they are only asking their own supporters. Telephone and internet polls are tedious and boring, while street and door2door pollsters are easily ignored or abused, while the weighting of the results to increase the accuracy reminds me more of the acronym GIGO, garbage in, garbage out. Really, who is going to waste their time answering lots of questions, unless they feel they can influence the results?

    And all that, before I even mention my suspicion that some of the parties are intentionally rigging the polls by making sure their own supporters flood them.
    Polls are weighted to reflect the voteshare and turnout at the previous election, just in 2017 more young people turned out because Corbyn promised free tuition fees for all unlike Ed Miliband
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 1,143
    Antoinette Sandbach, the Tory backbencher, asked Davis whether they could have regulatory alignment for the whole of the UK. Davis replied that this was the intention. He added that alignment is not the same as harmonisation.

    The former British ambassador to the US Sir Christopher Meyer says it’s an important distinction that can be summed up as ‘the difference between singing in unison and singing in harmony’


    https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2017/12/david-davis-suggests-regulatory-alignment-will-apply-to-whole-of-the-uk/

    Imperfect metaphore: singing in unison corresponds to "harmonisation", and singing in harmony corresponds to "alignment".
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 8,837
    kyf_100 said:

    Nigelb said:

    It's a new world of sorts.
    Crypto currency miners are chartering 747s to get graphics cards delivered more quickly....
    https://qz.com/1039809/amd-shares-are-soaring-ethereum-miners-are-renting-boeing-747s-to-ship-graphics-cards-to-mines/

    Ethereum does have a plan to stop having to do this (proof-of-stake instead of proof-of-work) but unfortunately it's taking a while to get the design right.
    For anyone who's interested, this is the best critique of the proof of stake model I have read.

    https://medium.com/@tuurdemeester/critique-of-buterins-a-proof-of-stake-design-philosophy-49fc9ebb36c6

    The point of bitcoin is to provide security and it's not a given that proof of stake is as secure as proof of work, nor will it ever be.

    Posters comparing the energy costs to the cost of Visa transactions, etc, are missing the point. Visa can, and do, cancel cards on a whim. Banks can, and do, freeze accounts and assets and allow governments to seize funds. None of this is possible with bitcoin. That is its value.
    As demonstrated by the DAO debacle with Ethereum faith in immutable technology to guarantee anything is a foolish one indeed.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 41,925

    Pulpstar said:

    It was apparent at the time that the Conservatives' hubris was leading them to target unrealistic seats. It was less apparent that Labour's defeatism was leading them to fail to target realistic seats.

    But where to target ?

    It was a very difficult election to get that right - Take the East Midlands..

    In Ashfield the Tories are now within 1,000 , whereas High Peak is over 2,300 votes away ! Not sure even Rogerdamus could have predicted that one.

    Not entirely leave/remain broken either - again why did the Tories take Mansfield, come close in Ashfield but up in the NorthEast get walloped in Hartlepool which on any model (Even accounting for differential leave/remain swing) goes blue before Ashfield.
    I take that point. But the Conservatives could probably have set aside their reported efforts in Barnsley East, Bolsover and West Bromwich East before pondering their options too much more deeply.
    The next election will be easier I think, as Brexit has redrawn the map as much as it will go. Barnsley East and West Brom East are miles out so no efforts there. Bolsover will continue to drift Tory I think - however its too far out still for 2022.

    Mansfield, Broxtowe, Ashfield, High Peak look like the main battleground seats near me.
  • El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 293
    edited December 5
    Wow. The DUP has just torpedoed the entire basis of the agreement.

    Nigel Dodds quoted in the Guardian liveblog:

    He says the “regulatory alignment” proposals were introduced by the Irish government. They are not necessary. There are sensible approaches to the border issue, such as trusted trader schemes.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 20,498
    edited December 5
    The interesting thing about the opinion polls at the moment is that however you take an average of them Labour are not advancing on their general election showing. If you take an average of the last 5 polls, Labour are on just over 41%, if you take an average of the last 10 polls, Labour are on just over 41%. The same is true for the last 15 or 20 polls. At the general election Labour polled just over 41%. The only change is a small drop in the Tory share going to minor parties.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 4,477
    stevef said:

    OchEye said:

    I am absolutely no fan of May but if this is true and this was the sort of polling both Labour and the Tories were seeing, isn't that enough to reevaluate the view that May was wrong to go for the election?

    20:20 hindsight is a wondrous thing but I wonder how many politicians could have resisted calling an election if they were seeing those sorts of numbers.

    Personally, it was the TV pictures of the numbers turning up to see and listen to Corbyn at the many mass meetings that he held. It was at least to my mind, obvious that a sea change was happening. While in comparison, when May tried similar tactics, she had to try and arrange her supporters around her to make it look like large crowds, and failed. Sorry, but you just can't buy the support and the enthusiasm for Corbyn is getting, even now, when the press are still trying to ignore him.

    So why were the polls, and particularly the internal party polls so wrong before the GE? Increasingly, because they are only asking their own supporters. Telephone and internet polls are tedious and boring, while street and door2door pollsters are easily ignored or abused, while the weighting of the results to increase the accuracy reminds me more of the acronym GIGO, garbage in, garbage out. Really, who is going to waste their time answering lots of questions, unless they feel they can influence the results?

    And all that, before I even mention my suspicion that some of the parties are intentionally rigging the polls by making sure their own supporters flood them.
    The polls were not wrong. They were self denying. People voted to stop what the polls were accurately predicting.
    But many of the pollsters were not predicting a big Tory win by the last week of the campaign - indeed some were implying a Hung Parliament.
  • DanSmithDanSmith Posts: 1,063

    Wow. The DUP has just torpedoed the entire basis of the agreement.

    Nigel Dodds quoted in the Guardian liveblog:

    He says the “regulatory alignment” proposals were introduced by the Irish government. They are not necessary. There are sensible approaches to the border issue, such as trusted trader schemes.
    A trusted trader scheme is not really a sensible proposal.
This discussion has been closed.