the snap general election thread

ess0two

gfplux wrote: »

You really don't understand the world.
Actions of the British Government effect directly ALL British citizens wherever they live.
Just because I don't live in Britain does not mean that I am unaffected or concerned.
That is why I am angry that I am about to lose the opportunity to vote.

You choose to live elsewhere, and as such abide by the decision given voting time limits.
If its that much of a bother move back here.

Wednesday2000

I just saw Tim Farron on Peston not giving a straight answer to whether gay sex is a sin.

Filo25

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 48% (+2)
LAB: 26% (+1)
LDEM: 10% (-1)
UKIP: 8% (-)
GRN: 3% (-1)

(via ICM)

Apart from Survation the others seem to be showing a relatively consistent picture.

Spidernick

I think this sums the whole situation up the best:

antrobus

Filo25 wrote: »

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 48% (+2)
LAB: 26% (+1)
LDEM: 10% (-1)
UKIP: 8% (-)
GRN: 3% (-1)

(via ICM)

Apart from Survation the others seem to be showing a relatively consistent picture.

The last Survation poll was in January and showed a 9% Con lead. It was one of the few 2017 polls that showed only a single digit Con lead. (The others were all Opinium.)

I think that Survation use telephone polling, whereas the others tend to do online polling. And so I believe their argument, back in 2015, was that was why they more right. By phoning people who were on the electoral register they got a more representative sample than other pollsters who were contacting people who had signed up with them.

Of course the online boys say that they have now taken steps to remove the bias in their samples. Perhaps they have all over done it. Or perhaps Survation were just lucky last time around. I have no idea myself.

davomcdave

antrobus wrote: »

The last Survation poll was in January and showed a 9% Con lead. It was one of the few 2017 polls that showed only a single digit Con lead. (The others were all Opinium.)

I think that Survation use telephone polling, whereas the others tend to do online polling. And so I believe their argument, back in 2015, was that was why they more right. By phoning people who were on the electoral register they got a more representative sample than other pollsters who were contacting people who had signed up with them.

Of course the online boys say that they have now taken steps to remove the bias in their samples. Perhaps they have all over done it. Or perhaps Survation were just lucky last time around. I have no idea myself.

I'm sure Survation would tell you that a sample of one doesn't tell us anything!

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Spidernick wrote: »

I think this sums the whole situation up the best:

Well now is the ideal opportunity for you to convince as many like-minded people as you can - and do something concrete about it rather than merely appear disgruntled on internet forums.
Let us know how you get on, would you?

BobQ

davomcdave wrote: »

I'm sure Survation would tell you that a sample of one doesn't tell us anything!

It was a sample of 2000+ as I recall

antrobus

BobQ wrote: »

It was a sample of 2000+ as I recall

Perhaps he meant that Survation was just one poll.

But then there's only one general election as well.

padington

Four new promised bank holidays will increase the Corbyn vote by quite a bit. He just needs to promise to sell the crown state and share it out and he might have a chance.

I always thought it was possible he would just get silly ... and it might even work if he did. Watch the polls change now.