Who will be the new Labour leader?

[MarshPhantom]

0000 said:

Justayellowbadge said:

MarshPhantom said:

It's the only logical reason for him not fronting up for the leader's debates.

I understood the idea was a carefully conceived plan to place Ed on an equal footing with 'the rest of the losers' on the podium.

Gosh, if only there was some way of having such a decision validated.

But prior to the election the no show stance was doing them no favours in the polls and most agree he had a terrible campaign. To be slightly less out of your depth than Miliband is hardly a ringing endorsement.

[turbobloke]

MarshPhantom said:

0000 said:

Justayellowbadge said:

MarshPhantom said:

It's the only logical reason for him not fronting up for the leader's debates.

I understood the idea was a carefully conceived plan to place Ed on an equal footing with 'the rest of the losers' on the podium.

Gosh, if only there was some way of having such a decision validated.

But prior to the election the no show stance was doing them no favours in the polls...

Polls were wrong.

MarshPhantom said:

...and most agree he had a terrible campaign

Most were wrong.

[Ali G]

Simply as a means of observing a singularity combined with massive weight...

There can only be one!

[MarshPhantom]

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

0000 said:

Justayellowbadge said:

MarshPhantom said:

It's the only logical reason for him not fronting up for the leader's debates.

I understood the idea was a carefully conceived plan to place Ed on an equal footing with 'the rest of the losers' on the podium.

Gosh, if only there was some way of having such a decision validated.

But prior to the election the no show stance was doing them no favours in the polls...

Polls were wrong.

The Tories didn't know the polls were wrong.

[anonymous-user]

deadslow said:

Arrogant braying of the tory-boys in full entitlement mode does go on a bit.

To be fair they have had to put up with the incessant whining of you Scots for what seems like an eternity.

[turbobloke]

MarshPhantom said:

turbobloke said:

MarshPhantom said:

0000 said:

Justayellowbadge said:

MarshPhantom said:

It's the only logical reason for him not fronting up for the leader's debates.

I understood the idea was a carefully conceived plan to place Ed on an equal footing with 'the rest of the losers' on the podium.

Gosh, if only there was some way of having such a decision validated.

But prior to the election the no show stance was doing them no favours in the polls...

Polls were wrong.

The Tories didn't know the polls were wrong.

Yes, they did.

Dan Hodges article in The Spectator as posted by Zod said:

The Conservatives spotted it. Perhaps not the full scale of their impending triumph, but they were certain (see Sebastian Payne’s article) that they were heading for victory. At about 10 a.m. on polling day morning, I phoned one of David Cameron’s senior advisers. He was the most relaxed I’d heard him throughout the entire campaign.

‘We’re pretty confident we’ve done enough,’ he said, adding that the estimate made at the weekend of 298 Tory seats had been raised to 302. I asked about the opinion polls, all of which showed a drift back to Labour. He laughed and said: ‘Wait until tomorrow morning. The polling companies are going to be in a lot of trouble’. So it was to prove.

With my emphasis (bold).

[Zod]

MarshPhantom said:

The Tories didn't know the polls were wrong.

Labour did, but nobody told Ed.

[turbobloke]

Zod said:

MarshPhantom said:

The Tories didn't know the polls were wrong.

Labour did, but nobody told Ed.

[Justayellowbadge]

MarshPhantom said:

0000 said:

Justayellowbadge said:

MarshPhantom said:

It's the only logical reason for him not fronting up for the leader's debates.

I understood the idea was a carefully conceived plan to place Ed on an equal footing with 'the rest of the losers' on the podium.

Gosh, if only there was some way of having such a decision validated.

But prior to the election the no show stance was doing them no favours in the polls and most agree he had a terrible campaign. To be slightly less out of your depth than Miliband is hardly a ringing endorsement.

Have a look at the debates thread here - a number, including a couple who have posted above, called it as the right decision at the time. Fairly firmly.

[anonymous-user]

MarshPhantom said:

The Tories didn't know the polls were wrong.

I don't know how the polls are ever right. Surely the method used to take the sample is never going to produce a random sample. People with a land line in the phone book who are home and have nothing better to do than talk to a pollster at 3 in the afternoon; pensioners. People wondering round the high street during the working day; young mums and unemployed. When does your average worker ever get asked or ever bother to answer?

[Ali G]

fblm said:

I don't know how the polls are ever right. Surely the method used to take the sample is never going to produce a random sample. People with a land line in the phone book who are home and have nothing better to do than talk to a pollster at 3 in the afternoon; pensioners. People wondering round the high street during the working day; young mums and unemployed. When does your average worker ever get asked or ever bother to answer?

And there may be some very highly paid people who fail/ed to provide poll readings which represent sentiment accurately!

Therein may lie something of interest.

[Don]

Yvette Cooper has now thrown her hat into the ring for the Labour leadership.

Brilliant. What a lacklustre pool Labour have got to select a leader from. I couldn't be happier.

[Vaud]

fblm said:

I don't know how the polls are ever right. Surely the method used to take the sample is never going to produce a random sample. People with a land line in the phone book who are home and have nothing better to do than talk to a pollster at 3 in the afternoon; pensioners. People wondering round the high street during the working day; young mums and unemployed. When does your average worker ever get asked or ever bother to answer?

Couple of points

Political polls can use ex directory as far as I remember.
Polling isn't just done in the day time
A broad mix is possible and they spend a lot of money doing it

Problem is the shy Tory and that voters lie.

[Ali G]

Vaud said:

Problem is the shy Tory and that voters lie.

Issues presumably still on the 'too hard' pile to factor in?

[turbobloke]

Ali G said:

Vaud said:

Problem is the shy Tory and that voters lie.

Issues presumably still on the 'too hard' pile to factor in?

Way too hard

[MarshPhantom]

fblm said:

MarshPhantom said:

The Tories didn't know the polls were wrong.

I don't know how the polls are ever right. Surely the method used to take the sample is never going to produce a random sample. People with a land line in the phone book who are home and have nothing better to do than talk to a pollster at 3 in the afternoon; pensioners. People wondering round the high street during the working day; young mums and unemployed. When does your average worker ever get asked or ever bother to answer?

Pollsters get paid good money to produce reliable polls, if they were unreliable what would be the point?

[turbobloke]

MarshPhantom said:

fblm said:

MarshPhantom said:

The Tories didn't know the polls were wrong.

I don't know how the polls are ever right. Surely the method used to take the sample is never going to produce a random sample. People with a land line in the phone book who are home and have nothing better to do than talk to a pollster at 3 in the afternoon; pensioners. People wondering round the high street during the working day; young mums and unemployed. When does your average worker ever get asked or ever bother to answer?

Pollsters get paid good money to produce reliable polls, if they were unreliable what would be the point?

None that I can see. Maybe they were trained on overall QA by the Ratings Agencies.

[anonymous-user]

Vaud said:

fblm said:

I don't know how the polls are ever right. Surely the method used to take the sample is never going to produce a random sample. People with a land line in the phone book who are home and have nothing better to do than talk to a pollster at 3 in the afternoon; pensioners. People wondering round the high street during the working day; young mums and unemployed. When does your average worker ever get asked or ever bother to answer?

Couple of points

Political polls can use ex directory as far as I remember.
Polling isn't just done in the day time
A broad mix is possible and they spend a lot of money doing it

Problem is the shy Tory and that voters lie.

Interesting. Do they ever call mobiles? Personally I have never had a landline and I don't think I know anyone under 40 who doesn't live in the sticks who does. Secondly they can spend all the money they like doing it but if a certain segment does not engage with cold callers then it's not a random sample. I suspect of course they know this and adjust their raw data using past differences between expected and actual. Getting a random sample representative the target population is far harder than it sounds.

[turbobloke]

fblm said:

Vaud said:

fblm said:

I don't know how the polls are ever right. Surely the method used to take the sample is never going to produce a random sample. People with a land line in the phone book who are home and have nothing better to do than talk to a pollster at 3 in the afternoon; pensioners. People wondering round the high street during the working day; young mums and unemployed. When does your average worker ever get asked or ever bother to answer?

Couple of points

Political polls can use ex directory as far as I remember.
Polling isn't just done in the day time
A broad mix is possible and they spend a lot of money doing it

Problem is the shy Tory and that voters lie.

Interesting. Do they ever call mobiles? Personally I have never had a landline and I don't think I know anyone under 40 who doesn't live in the sticks who does. Secondly they can spend all the money they like doing it but if a certain segment does not engage with cold callers then it's not a random sample. I suspect of course they know this and adjust their raw data using past differences between expected and actual. Getting a random sample representative the target population is far harder than it sounds.

Deming and Shewhart would have sorted this.

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

Deming and Shewhart would have sorted this.

I doubt Shewharts telephones hung up on him when he sampled them!