Jump to content
John Lambies Doos

Polling: 2017 General Election, Council Elections and Independence

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Pato said:

This is all very funny and that's all I have to contribute to the discourse at the present time.

I'm still in the camp of finding it all a bit sad. The Emperor's been trying out his invisible socks since 2014, but has well and truly gone for the full outfit now and isn't too fussed who he surrounds himself with so long as they say he's looks resplendent.

No wonder he always looks so bloody miserable these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, John Lambies Doos said:
14 minutes ago, betting competition said:
 

Interesting, I presume the Alba party are promoting a SNP vote in constituencies?

Obviously. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:
4 minutes ago, ayrmad said:
Obviously. 

Clearly, but just asking if they are actively pushing it in their rhetoric

They are but reading the comments of some would suggest they'll struggle to vote SNP 1,I've hardly ever read comments sections on anything that makes me want to vote for anyone, cultists and nut jobs and everything in between appears to be the norm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, John Lambies Doos said:
26 minutes ago, betting competition said:
 

Interesting, I presume the Alba party are promoting a SNP vote in constituencies?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone's going to have to explain where all those extra list votes for the Greens and Alba and the Galloway clowns are coming from, as the losses from the mainstream parties (and the busted flush Lib Dems) do not match up. Are UKIP's remnant or simply don't know taking the heavy dunt? 

I'm not surprised by that Alba figure: if the SNP constituency vote holds up as polled then that would work out better for the Yes coalition in terms of the Holyrood arithmetic at least. If the SNP don't clean up the constituency seats and lose second votes in the same regions though then it could backfire. The margins are pretty tight between those two outcomes. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 minutes ago, betting competition said:

 

The buckled Yoon framing for this poll is clearly established then. 79 Yes votes is a plain majority - in the same way that there has been an independence majority at Holyrood since 2014. Another ten Yoons getting punted out would be delicious though. 

Unless the sample size of the poll is in the 10,000 range then regional list projections for Galloway or any other candidate (i.e. Salmond) should be filed in the bin. 

Edited by vikingTON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NB: In an independent Scotland we'd clearly have regular full-size polls being devoted to each Scottish region - similar to state polls In the US - which would give both a better prediction of the outcome and the voter the information needed to make a genuine tactical choice on the list. 

If the Greens are on 11% in the West of Scotland for example then an extra vote for them is worth far more than if they're on 8%. The current polls cannot provide this information. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
The buckled Yoon framing for this poll is clearly established then. 79 Yes votes is a plain majority - in the same way that there has been an independence majority at Holyrood since 2014. Another ten Yoons getting punted out would be delicious though. 
Unless the sample size of the poll is in the 10,000 range then regional list projections for Galloway or any other candidate (i.e. Salmond) should be filed in the bin. 
With an error margin of +/- 3% then the further away from 50% you get the bigger the error becomes.

With an error margin like that Alba could be anywhere between 3% and 9%; AFU could be between 1% and 7%.

If 1,000 people are polled (a typical polling sample) then we are talking 60 people responded Alba and 40 people responded AFU - weighting might be screwing this up as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, virginton said:

Someone's going to have to explain where all those extra list votes for the Greens and Alba and the Galloway clowns are coming from, as the losses from the mainstream parties (and the busted flush Lib Dems) do not match up. Are UKIP's remnant or simply don't know taking the heavy dunt? 

I'm not surprised by that Alba figure: if the SNP constituency vote holds up as polled then that would work out better for the Yes coalition in terms of the Holyrood arithmetic at least. If the SNP don't clean up the constituency seats and lose second votes in the same regions though then it could backfire. The margins are pretty tight between those two outcomes. 

 

Some saying on twitter that Panelbase prompted for 'The Alba Party (led by Alex Salmond). Think only 1009 took part in the poll so how can they get that figures for Alba and All for Unity

Edited by betting competition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

Assuming the error margin is +/- 3% then quite possibly the AFU figure is nonsense

That doesn't explain where the support has come from in this particular poll though. There's a net 4% overall vote share gain for diddy list parties coming from somewhere else that isn't SNP/Tory/Labour/LibDem losses. Alba/Green/Galloway are up 12 while the latter lose 8.

The margin of error is another valid issue though, that is always going to place the Alba figure between irrelevant/handful of seats territory. That's the limitation of this level of polling - when the cut-off for a list seat in a region is around 6%, a nationwide poll with a +/-3% margin error is as useful as a chocolate teapot in predicting the outcome or even relevance for minor parties. 

The Galloway claim isn't even margin of error: as a national level poll, they would get zero seats for 4%. They must be inferring either from a South of Scotland subsection or their own beliefs to get Galloway a seat. Indeed, given the mixed nature of constituency seats, the South of Scotland might require the highest level of support to win a seat on the list. The SNP, Labour and Tories are all likely to stack up votes without dominating the constituencies and decimating their list vote as a result. Then there's Lib Dems and the Greens as well. 

Edited by vikingTON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, betting competition said:

Some saying on twitter that Panelbase prompted for 'The Alba Party (led by Alex Salmond). Think only 1009 took part in the poll so how can they get that figures for Alba and All for Unity

That's a standard sized poll for national figures. If they're breaking it down to produce regional list gains then you can file that part in the bin though. 

Scotland needs polls of 1000 voters in the South of Scotland, West, Glasgow etc. each to make an informed decision given our electoral system but we get this back of a fag packet nonsense instead. 

Edited by vikingTON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That doesn't explain where the support has come from in this particular poll though. There's a net 4% overall vote share gain for diddy list parties coming from somewhere else that isn't SNP/Tory/Labour/LibDem losses. Alba/Green/Galloway are up 12 while the latter lose 8.
The margin of error is another valid issue though, that is always going to place the Alba figure between irrelevant/handful of seats territory. That's the limitation of this level of polling - when the cut-off for a list seat in a region is around 6%, a nationwide poll with a +/-3% margin error is as useful as a chocolate teapot in predicting the outcome or even relevance for minor parties. 
The Galloway claim isn't even margin of error: as a national level poll, they would get zero seats for 4%. They must be inferring either from a South of Scotland subsection or their own beliefs to get Galloway a seat. Indeed, given the mixed nature of constituency seats, the South of Scotland might require the highest level of support to win a seat on the list. The SNP, Labour and Tories are all likely to stack up votes without dominating the constituencies and decimating their list vote as a result. Then there's Lib Dems and the Greens as well. 
Add up the % of the 5 parties (SNP, Green, LD, Tory, SLab) in the 3-5 March poll - it comes to 96% - 4% not accounted for.

The previous poll was the same - 4% unaccounted for - for both it is saying "other parties" - Ballot Box Scotland says it was a flat "other" for everyone bar the 5 main parties.

So others have risen from 4% to 10% - a 6% difference - that gives you an 8% drop from the 4 mainstream parties once you add in the 2% increase in the Greens.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really important to note with this poll that it prompted for Alba and AFU, and for Alba it named Alex Salmond (which isn't how it will appear on ballot papers). They didn't prompt for any other minority party. That could easily cause an oversample.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Emergence of Alba will show a higher pro indy vote overall (regardless of seats) .  Discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...