Opinion Polls

[Dick Moby]

From what I can pick up it was a case of a complete loss of faith in the Labour party and it was pretty much a case of anything would be better than that shower. So in view of that I suppose if Basil Brush had stood for the seat he would have still beaten Alexander.

[one eyed jack]

Maybe the rule of thumb should be: Whatever the opinion polls say the exit polls will say the opposite

[David Johnson]

Agreed. I am all for giving youth a chance but to vote in a 20 year old who has never had any other job apart from a holiday job, presumably in between college terms seems to be going a bit far in giving youth a chance!

What next? An MP who fits in their MP duties with studying for their GCSEs?

[David Johnson]

I would have thought that the overwhelming majority of people who were voting for someone to keep another party out would have decided the best way to do that by the day before the election.

The polls taken on the day before polling day were still showing it too close to call.

[David Johnson]

Thanks for the link. An interesting read. The bottom line is that the polls consistently underestimated the Tory vote and overestimated the Labour vote. Now the writer of your link argues that the actual result is within the margin of error.

Well, if this margin of error results in a situation that instead of a hung parliament with the Tories and Labour neck and neck, there is an overall Tory majority for the first time since 1992 then there is clearly something wrong with the methodology e.g. the sampling numbers. To end up with the situation that occured last Thursday makes the polls largely useless.

The argument that your writer makes that it was the interpretation of the polls that was wrong does not hold water. Many pollsters themselves have not tried to argue this and instead highlighted the deficiencies in the polls e.g. Populus

"Election results raise serious issues for pollsters. We will look at our methods and have urged the British Polling Council to set up a review"

As a result "
The British Polling Council announced the investigation, led by Patrick Sturgis, director of the ESRC National Centre for Research Methods, after several polls in the run-up to the vote showed that the Conservatives and Labour were neck-and-neck, suggesting a hung parliament.

George Osborne said the polls would face a ?big post-mortem? after so many failed to predict the outcome while Michelle Harrison, of TNS, a polling company, admitted it had been a ?mixed night for the polling community?.

I cannot believe that these statements would have been made if it was simply a case that the polls margin of error was not taken into account when interpreting the results.

On a separate issue, given the SNP won 56 of the 59 Westminster seats, can you please give us an update on what life in a one party state is like, Mick?

Please let us know when the first billboard posters, the size of an office block start appearing in Glasgow and Edinburgh with pictures of Alec Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon beaming down on the oh so fortunate Scottish population!!!

[Essex Lad]

David Johnson wrote:

> "Not sure that is strictly true. It might be someone who lives
> in a working class area and is embarrassed to admit that they
> vote Tory. "
>
> Perhaps but it is more due to a realisation that the Tories are
> the enemy of the unemployed, the vulnerable etc. in society. I
> do not buy the Tory argument that the vast increase in food
> bank use is simply down to the increased awareness of their
> existence.

I suppose the Tory view is that the unemployed are a drain on resources, therefore it should be made difficult for them until or unless they contribute to society. However, Cameron did lift many of the lowest paid out of paying any tax at all at least allowing them to spend their money however they wish.


>
> "Most people with a heart (yes, even some Tories have a heart)
> do not begrudge the sick and disabled as much help as is
> possible. The problem begins when you see people like those on
> Benefits Street and the genuine unemployed get lumped in with
> scroungers."
>
> Well I did say "as far as possible" and the Tories seem to
> think that the "the Big Society" should replace a lot of public
> sector involvement.

Bit of a change from Cameron's heroine Margaret "There is no such thing as society" Thatcher...


>
> "Yes, most people who don't vote Labour think the state should
> interfere as little as possible. Mainly because the state is
> not very good at running things..."
>
> Disagree. So you think that the energy sector, railways, the
> private housing sector with the collapse of social housing is
> now a huge improvement on the cost/benefit provided by the
> state run services? I do not think that is the case.

The state is not good at running things. Remember how you would have to wait months to have a phone installed? You being so old probably got your first handset from Bell personally . Private housing ? since Thatcher sold off council houses to win in 1979, no government has had much of a social housing building programme. The same company built Wembley and the Emirates. One was hired by the government and the other by a private organisation. Wembley went vastly over budget and was late, the Emirates was delivered early and under budget. However, I do think the railways should be renationalised.

>
> "No, that may be the essence of Thatcherism. It is not the
> essence of Toryism as many genuine One Nation Tories would
> attest."
>
> Disagree. Much of one nation Toryism is a marketing concept.
> We all remember Cameron hugging a husky with plans to be the
> greenest government in history. The nation is far, far more
> divided now than what it was in 2010 as a result of a concerted
> Tory plan to set the employed against the unemployed and the
> private sector against the public sector. So much for
> Cameron's One Nation Toryism.

I was referring more to the One Nation Tories likes Macmillan and Whitelaw, the patrician Conservatives who still exist not red Tories like Cameron.

>
> "And sadly not a problem addressed by either Blair or Brown in
> 13 years."
>
> Agreed.
>
> "If you don't think that most people vote for what does them
> personally good, then you are living in a very nice world."
>
> Voting for personal interest and the common good are not
> mutually exclusive. For example, a desire to vote for a party
> whoever it might be that plans to increase the building of
> social housing could both meet the personal interest as well as
> the common good.

No, indeed they are not. But that is not how it works. People (in general) vote for the party that does them the most good, be it buying their council house, lowering their taxes, etc. Labour did not lose the election because they were not left-wing enough.

>
> The problem with the Tories is that they are all about
> supporting the employed private sector worker to the detriment
> off the unemployed or public sector workers which is why
> Osborne launched a relentless divisive assault on the
> unemployed and public sector in the early years of this
> government.

As stated above, surely that is because the employed private sector worker is more of a benefit (no pun intended) to society than the unemployed?

[David Johnson]

"I suppose the Tory view is that the unemployed are a drain on resources"

That is still no reason to vilify the unemployed and try to create hatred of them as Osborne tried to do e.g next door neighbours' bedroom curtains drawn as you go to work.

"Bit of a change from Cameron's heroine Margaret "There is no such thing as society" Thatcher..."

Not really. I doubt if Thatcher would have spoken out against the role of volunteering or charity that is at the heart of Cameron's Big Society.

"The state is not good at running things."

Apart from disagreeing with yourself when you state that you are in favour of rail re-nationalisation, you make no mention of the fact that not only are we ripped off by many of the utility companies for example, but that an overwhelming number of privatised industries are owned by overseas companies so a lot of the taxes do not benefit the UK treasury at all.

"No, indeed they are not. But that is not how it works."

In some no, in others yes.

"As stated above, surely that is because the employed private sector worker is more of a benefit (no pun intended) to society than the unemployed?"


This illustrates the total misconception at the heart of Toryism.

The Tory strongholds are in the south east of England which is a different country entirely to the north. The south east has significantly lower unemployment rates and the number of well paid jobs completely outweighs those in the North. This is reflected by the astounding house prices in the south east paid by those trying to buy in to the relative success of that part of the country. In the north, many unemployed people are desperate for a decent, permanent job which allows them to leave home, rent or buy a house etc.

One thing that Miliband was absolutely right about was that unless we move away from minimum wage, zero hours contracts, self employment etc. this country will never pay off its deficit because the drop in tax receipts would never allow this to happen unless the pubic sector is dismantled entirely. What is required is a decent living wage, real jobs not phony self employed jobs, real apprenticeships not just the apprenticeships supplied by supermarkets who move Fred from the till to learning how to fillet fish etc.

THe Tories are unlikely to provide this.

[Essex Lad]

And Labour did next to nothing about it either.

Of talk of the south being Tory strongholds, they have seats all over England. Now for the first time since the Eighties, you can now walk from Land?s End to just south of the Scottish capital without ever leaving a Tory-held seat.

[David Johnson]

"Now for the first time since the Eighties, you can now walk from Land?s End to just south of the Scottish capital without ever leaving a Tory-held seat".

Yeah, with some massive diversions from how the crow flies and ending just north of Lancaster. Scotland doesn't start there you know despite what Nigel Farage thinks!.

[number 6]

The only poll that matters in the future is the one that comes in at 10 pm on election night. I for one will never take notice of any opinion poll again.