UKC

They were all wrong. What is their excuse going to be?

In reply to MG:


Last minute voters.

In reply to MG:

The 25% undecideds that were in the figures but largely ignored by commentators.

In reply to MG:

Because if one side of the argument successfully labels the other party the "nasty party" then people won't admit to wanting to vote for them until it comes to a secret ballot.

Sort of what happened in Scotland with the No vote only appearing at the end in the face of withering fire from the Yes campaign.

In reply to MG:

They were correct in Scotland, and I guess they used the same methods both N & S of the border. So what was different in England ? (& did they get Wales & NI correct ?)

In reply to Skyfall:

Hardly a new situation though. I think banning all polling in the weeks prior to an election would be much more fun.

In reply to MG:

I thought this anonymous comment summed up a good point of view on the subject

"....If I disagree with the Guardian-reading lefties in my local (mainly teachers/ local government workers but all paid from taxation) the debate immediately descends into insult. If I question immigration I am a racist. If I disagree with any of the demands of the sisterhood I am a misogynist. If I do not want to pay yet more tax I am a Fascist. If I question the future of the NHS in its present form I am the Anti-Christ- there simply aren't enough "ists" to go around! What I do not get is informed debate to refute my suggestions. No wonder people have given up, and just don't bother admitting their true beliefs....."

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

Loads of people don't tell the truth to pollsters just for the fun of f&*^ing up the poll

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:

They called them "shy Tories" back in 92 when Major surprised the pollsters

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


The placing of insults on people who don't share the same views is one of the less attractive sides of human nature.

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


A ludicrous and tiresome hotchpotch of hackneyed stereotypes, trite over generalised guff and world weary 'oh poor me hasn't political correctness gone too far' Daily Mail drivel. Was it Alf Garnett that said this? Tell me, exactly what 'subject' was this 'good point of view' referring too?

In reply to Sir Chasm:


Yes, and the pressure to produce results when the data doesn't offer much up.

You'd think they'd describe the limits of the data but the problem here is that they don't know how to quantify or even identify a large chunk of missing data, so discussing it would only focus attention on the inability of polls to produce results.

Did anyone, anywhere suggest a Tory majority? (Beyond hopeful Tories wishing).

In reply to MG:

Same as last time. I think five years ago, the same exit poll predicted the correct result pretty closely too.

Those coming out of a polling station are a different group to the sampling done in the run-up to polling day.

I don't understand why poll methodologies have not been adapted to incorporate this effect.

In reply to winhill:


Perhaps in your latter category but I think Matthew Paris did a few weeks ago but later backtracked.

In reply to MG:

A Glasgow man who bet £30,000 on the Conservatives winning a majority in the general election has pocketed £210,000.

The pensioner made the bet at a city branch of Ladbrokes 10 days before the vote, at odds of seven to one.

In reply to mac fae stirling:
Bitter much Dear? lol

Quote was from Guardian, from this mornings article "How did the polls get it so wrong"full quote below just for you

Stevenbeancounter 7 hr ago
"When I was young I voted Labour. It seemed inconceivable to me that anyone could vote for the likes of Sir Alec Douglas-Home and his ilk. Labour had total command of the moral and intellectual heights. I now find that political debate is impossible. If I disagree with the Guardian-reading lefties in my local (mainly teachers/ local government workers but all paid from taxation) the debate immediately descends into insult. If I question immigration I am a racist. If I disagree with any of the demands of the sisterhood I am a misogynist. If I do not want to pay yet more tax I am a Fascist. If I question the future of the NHS in its present form I am the Anti-Christ- there simply aren't enough "ists" to go around! What I do not get is informed debate to refute my suggestions. No wonder people have given up, and just don't bother admitting their true beliefs. It is for this reason that the Labour party is dying. It is incapable of change, of even admitting that it may be wrong. Lets face it, if you can't beat the likes of Cameron what hope do you have for the future? The Labour vision, or rather lack of vision, has been dismissed in Scotland but is now being dismissed by those who see the Greens or UKIP as more likely to listen to their concerns. The Labour heartlands of the north and midlands are very likely to reject Labour next time around, as it has become the voice of the Islington champagne socialists and no longer has any relevance to the old core vote of working but poor people."


Oh, and it got 26 up votes...no idea if that's good or bad...just saying

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


I think the point is anyone who dribbles out those stereotypes is unlikely to be someone who is capable of having an informed political debate.
Its telling when they use the Guardian as the bench mark of being Labour considering they have switched to and fro from the lib dems. Tends to show someone who cant grasp anything beyond left and right.

In reply to dissonance:

Hhmm, dribbling stereo types you say?

"Alf garnet" "Daily Mail drivel" "political Correctness gone mad"

All from someone who admits to buying the socialist worker every week for the last 30 years?

Where were we?

In reply to Bjartur i Sumarhus:


I am really not sure where you are. Since I have no idea what you are wittering on about.