They have more of an interest in getting it right than electoral calculus do.

 

That doesn't necessarily mean they are any better at it, though. :unsure:

 

Presumably people bet based on opinion polls, so it's rather circular...

And the opinion polls are Tory tools, so...

And the opinion polls are Tory tools, so...

What even makes you say that?

That doesn't necessarily mean they are any better at it, though. :unsure:

 

Presumably people bet based on opinion polls, so it's rather circular...

Read what I said. They have more of an interest, so will be keener to get it right. If they thought electoral calculus were right, they would have adjusted their odds to reflect that in order to make a profit. If you're so sure the bookies have got it wrong, why not back it up with money?

Yes but odds are only ever based on what people bet on. Am I right? Am no betting expert but once read that somewhere anyway. The activity of the punters actually decide the odds. So if more punters bet on a hung parliament the odds for it fall. Please correct me if I'm wrong. The bookies may decide them initially but then they fluctuate according to what's being bet.

Edited November 7, 20195 yr by Freddie Kruger

Yes but odds are only ever based on what people bet on. Am I right? Am no betting expert but once read that somewhere anyway. The activity of the punters actually decide the odds. So if more punters bet on a hung parliament the odds for it fall. Please correct me if I'm wrong. The bookies may decide them initially but then they fluctuate according to what's being bet.

I think it's a mixture of the two. Most of it will be automated, but I'm sure people can intervene if the odds appear to be very wrong.

I think it's a mixture of the two. Most of it will be automated, but I'm sure people can intervene if the odds appear to be very wrong.

 

 

Okay I see.

What even makes you say that?

 

He's in denial of what they keep saying?

 

Read what I said. They have more of an interest, so will be keener to get it right. If they thought electoral calculus were right, they would have adjusted their odds to reflect that in order to make a profit. If you're so sure the bookies have got it wrong, why not back it up with money?

 

AFAIK it is very much punter-driven. If someone puts £1000 on a 100-1 shot, they'll then cut the odds dramatically, even though the likelihood of the outcome hasn't actually changed.

 

Yes but odds are only ever based on what people bet on. Am I right? Am no betting expert but once read that somewhere anyway. The activity of the punters actually decide the odds. So if more punters bet on a hung parliament the odds for it fall. Please correct me if I'm wrong. The bookies may decide them initially but then they fluctuate according to what's being bet.

 

That's what I thought too - see above.

The set of YouGov polls dividing things by region is interesting, you can see a summary on @BritainElects, but I have some concerns about them as a polling company. Not for the first time (article from 2017).

 

I have their surveys occasionally coming into one of my inboxes, but I don't often take them. Took one today, and a set of questions involved 'Imagine there was a general election tomorrow'. Fair enough for 'right-now' voting intentions, but one asked 'which party do you think will win the popular vote', and then 'most seats'. Any general election must have six weeks of campaigning involved, so I took that into account with my answers, but that's not what most will do. I don't know how they are planning to present the results to that question, it could be innocuous, but the obvious one you can imagine is to inform public opinion about who WILL win based on what people currently THINK.

 

There isn't nothing to distrust of opinion polls.

There isn't nothing to distrust of opinion polls.

 

I agree, but not to the extent of MM's near paranoia. :rolleyes:

The set of YouGov polls dividing things by region is interesting, you can see a summary on @BritainElects, but I have some concerns about them as a polling company. Not for the first time (article from 2017).

 

I have their surveys occasionally coming into one of my inboxes, but I don't often take them. Took one today, and a set of questions involved 'Imagine there was a general election tomorrow'. Fair enough for 'right-now' voting intentions, but one asked 'which party do you think will win the popular vote', and then 'most seats'. Any general election must have six weeks of campaigning involved, so I took that into account with my answers, but that's not what most will do. I don't know how they are planning to present the results to that question, it could be innocuous, but the obvious one you can imagine is to inform public opinion about who WILL win based on what people currently THINK.

 

There isn't nothing to distrust of opinion polls.

That YouGov poll is based on surveys taken last month. A lot has happened since then.

And Hitchins is 100% right. The polls are fake and designed to manipulate us into voting a certain way.

It was interesting to me to see the results for Scotland and see how the vote shares are moving. A big drop for Labour in Scotland and a solid dip for the Tories. The greens showing that they’ve enough support to really hurt the SNP in tight marginals like Perth.

 

A lot of the focus has been on tactical voting in England and Wales with everyone just assuming Scotland will turn SNP yellow again. I think this assumption is dangerous and will bite. The second lens of Independence seems to override sanity and will see remain voters back the Tories even though they know that they are the antithesis of what they believe in - just to keep out the SNP

And Hitchins is 100% right. The polls are fake and designed to manipulate us into voting a certain way.

 

How are they fake? :unsure:

 

Are you suggesting they don't actually ask people who they intend to vote for, and just completely pull figures out of the air? :huh:

*insert Yes Minister leading questions clip*

 

They are useful tools but they help form the narrative as well as report upon it. But don't bother on 'fake', he knows they aren't completely fake, we know that, but they can easily stretch the truth to reflect what is useful to show.

 

It was interesting to me to see the results for Scotland and see how the vote shares are moving. A big drop for Labour in Scotland and a solid dip for the Tories. The greens showing that they’ve enough support to really hurt the SNP in tight marginals like Perth.

 

A lot of the focus has been on tactical voting in England and Wales with everyone just assuming Scotland will turn SNP yellow again. I think this assumption is dangerous and will bite. The second lens of Independence seems to override sanity and will see remain voters back the Tories even though they know that they are the antithesis of what they believe in - just to keep out the SNP

 

I've always found it quite weird how the Tories became the unionist party of choice for so many Scottish constituencies, in many it just seems to be one of the main three parties as an anti-SNP vote and it's very often the Tories. It's weird given Scotland's near-complete rejection of the Tories for so long historically... though I suppose the answer is somewhere in that the SNP make Labour or Liberals surplus to requirements more often and Scottish Conservatives need someone to vote for.

 

Several marginals in Scotland, I'll be very interested to see how many go/stay SNP.

*insert Yes Minister leading questions clip*

 

They are useful tools but they help form the narrative as well as report upon it. But don't bother on 'fake', he knows they aren't completely fake, we know that, but they can easily stretch the truth to reflect what is useful to show.

 

But why would they? Polling companies are not partisan, and if their polls are seen to be inaccurate they will lose business from their non-political clients.

 

But why would they? Polling companies are not partisan, and if their polls are seen to be inaccurate they will lose business from their non-political clients.

I've tried pointing that out many times, but the message hasn't been received yet. The polling companies make relatively little money out of political polls. They serve as a marketing tool to gain business from corporate clients.

I've tried pointing that out many times, but the message hasn't been received yet. The polling companies make relatively little money out of political polls. They serve as a marketing tool to gain business from corporate clients.

 

I guess Michael wants my title as the most stubbornly opinionated poster on this forum... :heehee:

And yet they are tools for the elite to create bandwagons. That is all. Otherwise they wouldn't commission PRIVATE BEHIND THE SCENES POLLING!!

I guess Michael wants my title as the most stubbornly opinionated poster on this forum... :heehee:

 

 

Oi Vid hands off that's my title. :o You and Michael get in line. :D