|
The thing about increasing support in the under 65s is they still need to vote on the day
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 01:15 |
|
|
 (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 05:04
|
|
|
Oh also the polls probably wont have taken into account increased turnout amongst young people. The polls are all weighted based on historical turnout, so Labour support amongst young people will be under-represented. if people actually turn out and loving vote it might well be on!!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
Lol if the election results in a hung parliament.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 05:50
|
|
|
Pistol_Pete posted:Lol if the election results in a hung parliament. No, the absolute funniest result would be if the results end up exactly the same as 2015.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
If the Tories end up with a single seat less than 2015 I will probably die of laughter.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 07:10
|
|
|
So what's the debate situation look like
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 07:28
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:Oh also the polls probably wont have taken into account increased turnout amongst young people. Has there been any proof that the young vote will increase this election? Last I heard there were a couple million still not registered to vote.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 07:48
|
|
|
Registrations are not votes but: More than 714,000 young people have registered to vote since Theresa May called for a snap election, following a series of social media campaigns urging Facebook, Twitter and Snapchat users to sign up. Under 25s have sent off nearly 16,000 more applications than any other age group since the Prime Minister made the shock announcement on 18 April. They made up more than a third of the 150,000 potential voters who registered that day - a spike of around 140,000 in 24 hours. ... In total, The Register to Vote Service has recorded 714,595 under 25s applying to register between 18 April and 20 May. The second largest group to register during that period was 25-34-year-olds, who made 698,781 applications. Numbers for older age groups come in at less than half the latter figure, with 317,908 applications from 35-44-year-olds, and just 27,172 from the over 75s. But older voters are likely to have registered before the election was announced, and are much more likely to vote. Just 43 per cent of 18-24-year-olds cast their ballot in the 2015 general election, compared with 78% of people aged 65 or over, according to polling by Ipsos Mori. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/general-election-latest-young-people-voter-registration-under-25s-theresa-may-a7747681.html it would be interesting to see how this voter registration pattern compares to previous elections
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 07:56
|
|
|
so if I'm reading that correctly nearly 1.5m new registrations from under 34s...
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 07:59
|
|
|
I have an important UK service announcement. This week has been designated as "summer" and we may have temperatures over 20 c. Please attend your local bbq or try and organise one and forget about UK politics and or trump etc for at least a few hours. This may be your only chance this year.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:02
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:so if I'm reading that correctly nearly 1.5m new registrations from under 34s... Thats good, although I wonder how this will balance with the drop off from people who just wont bother this time around.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:04
|
|
|
A voter registration drive is a great move from Labor and will hopefully net them a surprise gain that the polls can't predict. Voter registration drives were a huge factor in Obama's 08 victory too.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:10
|
|
|
There's more registrations which is good but they still have to pitch up on the day and vote not Tory.Demiurge4 posted:A voter registration drive is a great move from Labor and will hopefully net them a surprise gain that the polls can't predict. Voter registration drives were a huge factor in Obama's 08 victory too. It's Labour.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:13
|
|
|
Demiurge4 posted:A voter registration drive is a great move from Labor and will hopefully net them a surprise gain that the polls can't predict. Voter registration drives were a huge factor in Obama's 08 victory too. Polls aren't predictions but why wouldn't the voting intentions of the young be represented in them? Polling companies don't just survey those who are registered to vote.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:16
|
|
|
maybe brexit has given young people a kick up the arse and they now realise that sometimes voting can be important
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:16
|
|
|
Possible but doubtful given that group of voters' past performance.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:20
|
|
|
boring poll details - long story short, some polls tale turnout into consideration, not others: Turnout at the last few elections has been only around 60% – so 4 out of 10 people, whatever they told pollsters, didn’t actually bother to vote (theoretically at least, actually the real percentage of people able to vote who do is higher than the quoted turnout. Quoted turnout figures are of all those people on the electoral register, some of whom will actually be dead or incapacitated). If supporters of different parties have different levels of turnout then this becomes an important consideration in polling, and one that in practice makes a big difference to published figures. All opinion polls include in their voting intention questions the chance to say “I wouldn’t vote”. In practice only a very small proportion of people, often under 10%, pick this option. Given the actual turnout at elections, it seems obvious that some people are saying they would vote tomorrow when in reality they wouldn’t. The challenge is working out who those people are. Aside from YouGov, who we will come to at the end of this article, the simplest approach to dealing with turnout is that taken by Ipsos MORI. Historically MORI never used to take account of turnout inbetween elections, taking a purist approach that polls away from elections were only snapshots of opinion, not election predictions. Come pre-election polls however they used to ask people to say how likely they were to vote, taking those who said they were very likely. The problem was that the proportion of people who said they would definitely vote was invariably higher than the actual turnout recorded at elections. It was necessary to more finely define people’s likelihood to vote. So instead MORI (indeed, all the pollsters) use a ten point scale, with 10 being the most likely to vote and 1 being definitely not voting. The proportion of people who rate their likelihood of voting at 10/10 has in the past been pretty close the proportion of people who actually vote, so MORI use this as a their turnout filter, taking only those people who say their chances of voting are 10/10 and assuming all other respondents will actually not bother to vote. Since 2003 MORI have done this for all their polls, though they still produce figures that are not adjusted for likelihood to vote to allow people to draw comparisons with pre-2003 data. The pattern of turnout in the UK is broadly consistent – Conservative voters are far more likely to tell pollsters they will actually vote than Labour voters are. Ipsos-MORI’s “10/10 only” filter is the most demanding used by any pollster and therefore the effect this has is to strongly favour the Conservative party. The reason that MORI’s polls do not normally show larger Conservative leads than other pollsters is that their weighting regime is more favourable to Labour than that of ICM and Populus, as we’ve seen here. The problem with MORI’s technique is that, while the proportion of 10/10s is roughly the same as actual turnout, not all those 10/10 people actually do vote, and many of those who say 9/10, 8/10 etc actually do. The graph below is from the 2005 British Election Study and shows people’s answers to the likelihood to vote question compared to whether they actually said they had voted when contacted after the election. Postal votes mess things up a bit, but you can see that in reality it is the case that the more likely people say they are to vote, the more likely they are to do so. On this basis Populus weight their voting intention figures according to how likely people say they are to vote. If someone says they are 10/10 likely to vote, they are given a weighting of 1.0 (in other words, they count as a full person). If someone rates their likelihood of voting at 8/10 they are given a weighting of 0.8, at 5/10 a weighting of 0.5 and so on down. ICM use a similar method. (see update below). ComRes weight all those who rate their chances of voting at 5 and above in the same way as Populus, but exclude people who rate their chances at below five. While there are subtle differences between ICM, Populus and ComRes’s weighting by turnout, they should be very minor and are unlikely to produce any significant variation. ICM have experimented using the three different methods, and report it makes no significant difference. Finally we come to YouGov. YouGov do not normally factor in turnout at all. All people giving a voting intention are assumed to be equally likely to vote. In theory, given the pattern of likelihood to vote we see in polls, this should produce polls with a higher level of support for Labour. In practice however it doesn’t, and when YouGov have produced figures that take into account likelihood to vote, such as at the 2004 London mayoral election, they have been less, not more, accurate. The reason for this is unclear, it may be that the social acceptance pressure that makes people claim they will vote when really they will not is not the same on an online survey, or perhaps people who don’t bother to vote also don’t bother to join a survey panel. UPDATE: Actually ICM seem to have changed their method, and are filtering their data, taking only those who say they are 7/10 or more likely to vote. http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/faq-turnout
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:21
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:so if I'm reading that correctly nearly 1.5m new registrations from under 34s... JFairfax posted:maybe brexit has given young people a kick up the arse and they now realise that sometimes voting can be important As an under-34 who registered to vote for the first time in my life the day after the election was announced, I really hope I'm not alone. My wife is an NHS nurse and I'm hearing a lot of (admittedly anecdotal) chatter about her colleagues registering too, although this is more aimed at keeping the Tories out rather than getting anyone specific in. I do like the way Corbyn's team are targeting summer festivals as well as traditional political events. Perhaps that will help get the younger population at least thinking about bothering to vote this time.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:38
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Possible but doubtful given that group of voters' past performance. Didn't it turn out that you nd people actually pitched up for the referendum in decent numbers, but were just dwarfed by the old folks vote.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 08:49
|
|
|
Namtab posted:Didn't it turn out that you nd people actually pitched up for the referendum in decent numbers, but were just dwarfed by the old folks vote. Yeah there were some early press reports in the tabloids i think along the lines of "well if young people cared so much they should have voted and they didn't", and some suggestion-reported-as-fact that a ridiculously low % of youngs voted. And then i guess some actually research was done and determined that young people did, in fact, vote in good numbers. That's my recollection but gently caress all y'all i aint sourcing any of it.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 09:02
|
|
|
I can't find anything but I'm guessing people with student loans would still have to pay them back under labour? It's not going to eliminate historic loans?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 09:04
|
|
|
They aren't planning to write off old loans, no. It'd be nice, but as long as future generations don't have to pay then it's cool.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 09:10
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:I can't find anything but I'm guessing people with student loans would still have to pay them back under labour? It's pretty unlikely they'd write off existing loans. I seem to remember the figure was around 33bn last time it was brought up here, and I can't see Labour finding that sort of change under the couch cushions when they want to spend on everything else. Also mine is mostly paid off and would be done before anything passes, so they better not :|
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 09:11
|
|
|
xtothez posted:It's pretty unlikely they'd write off existing loans. I seem to remember the figure was around 33bn last time it was brought up here, and I can't see Labour finding that sort of change under the couch cushions when they want to spend on everything else. The figure for only the tuition loans is actually very small, remember the tuition used to be only be a few thousand a year and many courses doesn't have them. The figure to wipe the tuition loans out was estimated at around £1 billion to buy all that debt back, as its at near junk status as the majority will never be repaid back.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 09:15
|
|
|
xtothez posted:As an under-34 who registered to vote for the first time in my life the day after the election was announced[...] Can I ask why you'd never registered before? It seems really weird to me that so many people don't vote.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 09:34
|
|
|
Dzhay posted:Can I ask why you'd never registered before? It seems really weird to me that so many people don't vote.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 09:50
|
|
|
I've never voted in a General. I've previously not voted because of weak national Labour platforms and safe sitting Labour MPs locally. I've lived in several 70+% majority Labour seats and I still do but the first time they're offering something I'm affirmatively excited to throw my vote in the bucket for. I think my vote matters on a national level, the morning after when it shows that Labour did better than anyone expected in national vote share.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 10:19
|
|
|
It's interesting how this 'national vote share' has become such an important metric for some. The number of MPs returned is more important.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 10:25
|
|
|
The issue is the change in voter registration rules mean there are probably still fewer young people registered to vote than ever before.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 10:28
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:It's interesting how this 'national vote share' has become such an important metric for some. Only if you're limiting your politics to parliament. I'm greatly cheered by seeing large %s of people willing to back the Labour manifesto and hope that they'll retain that desire to get those things into the next parliament no matter the election outcome.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:It's interesting how this 'national vote share' has become such an important metric for some. maybe popular representation would be better
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 10:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/GaryLineker/status/866581483263336448
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 10:33
|
|
|
No hash tag.... For fucksake Gary do you know nothing!?!
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 10:37
|
|
|
quote:General election 2017: Labour brings forward tuition fees pledge This seems good. It's a tangible benefit people will feel in the span of months if they vote Labour. Bit of a last minute push to get young people to register I hope.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 10:44
|
|
|
Their 'special page' about it is pretty fun.quote:Q: Is it true that Jeremy Corbyn wants to tax the family home?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 10:55
|
|
|
namesake posted:Only if you're limiting your politics to parliament. I'm greatly cheered by seeing large %s of people willing to back the Labour manifesto and hope that they'll retain that desire to get those things into the next parliament no matter the election outcome. Kurtofan posted:maybe popular representation would be better Depressing. Depressing because you both believe this and presumably there are many more like you. Every seat lost at the expense of focussing support elsewhere is a seat that's harder to win back when labour is in a position to form a government.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 11:07
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:so if I'm reading that correctly nearly 1.5m new registrations from under 34s... My registration will be counted as a "new registration in the under 34s", for example, but I have voted the past two GEs.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 11:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 01:15 |
|
|
Namtab posted:I don't think always having voted Labour is a good thing if Labour aren't offering policies you agree with. If flaps is voting Labour all the time because he always agrees with their policies then it's fine, it its because he just wants the red team to win regardless then it's less ok. One big problem with politics in general is people voting for their team rather than for what they believe in. If people had rejected this view and voted Labour instead of lib dem in 2010 wouldn't that have prevented Cameron from forming a government and all the tragic consequences that have followed from it?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2017 11:12
|
|