• Welcome to PASOTI (Sponsored by GA Solictors and Lang & Potter)
  • Hello guests - don't forget that by registering and signing up for Pasoti you'll see less adverts plus receive extras like free match tickets, taking part in polls, joining in the chat room and more. Come and join us!

I think Labour has got it wrong

signalspast

50/50 Sponsor
T.O Support
Aug 17, 2005
1,336
26
I'll sum it up in one sentence mate, Starmer's speech went down well with the public and some people are seething :mad:
No it went down well with the 1000 and aomething peiple they polled majority of population won't have a clue what he said
Polls are not supposed to indicate who is going to win an election , they are a snapshot of how people feel about something at a given time. You just explained the meaning of it , how it went down well, and then again called it meaningless . Ridiculous, and not that difficult to grasp.
The point is polls can no longer be considered as random members of the public. They are taken from persons that register with the relevant pollsters to start with. When the poll goes out it states what it's about so let's say the conversation piece and Starmer's speech. How many persons will just think not interested and not bother with it. The pollsters then choose from the ones rhat reply who takes part, many times they will get a message back stating rhat they are not within the demographics thats needed for that poll. Lastly it consisted of 1300 persons
 

Frank Butcher

Foodbank Donor
Oct 9, 2003
3,592
48
Gairloch
Actually polls are only useful when they're used as an indicator of trends, i.e. snapshot polls are definitely not the best indicators and are usually pretty pointless - in addition the margin of error is far to great. You're better off looking at trends of the same pollster over a number of months.

This shows that Labour had been making good headway in recent months - due in the main to the Tories' failings. That trend had slowed or reversed slightly in the last month with Tories still holding single digit leads. Only one poll in many months has shown a Labour lead and that has now been extinguished.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the coming months but Starmer's speech/popularity will only be one contribution to the trend. I think how people 'feel' about their lot tends to guide public sentiment the most - at least how the middle ground, floating voters 'feel'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GreenThing
May 16, 2016
3,867
212
Aren't the polls a bit like asking 1000 people as they leave Home Park's Devonport End after a good win, if they support Argyle ?

Then an alternative pollster asks 50 people leaving the Barn Park end the same question.

Each claiming theirs is a true representation how people and therefore the Country feels.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GreenThing
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
No it went down well with the 1000 and aomething peiple they polled majority of population won't have a clue what he said

The point is polls can no longer be considered as random members of the public. They are taken from persons that register with the relevant pollsters to start with. When the poll goes out it states what it's about so let's say the conversation piece and Starmer's speech. How many persons will just think not interested and not bother with it. The pollsters then choose from the ones rhat reply who takes part, many times they will get a message back stating rhat they are not within the demographics thats needed for that poll. Lastly it consisted of 1300 persons
"Respondents to the poll were shown a video of the highlights of the speech and then asked them a series of questions about how Starmer came across. Fieldwork was conducted immediately after the speech and Opinium spoke to 1330 people in total. The data is weighted to be representative of the adult population." And certainly all the Press including the right wing papers today think it's significant.

But I do get people who don't like the findings of a poll say it's meaningless.

Someone should tell Boris Johnson who spent £580,000 of public money on private polling that's it's all meaningless!
 

Daz

Administrator
Staff member
Pasoti Donor
Sep 30, 2003
2,670
237
42
The findings of this poll have nothing to do with why I find polls meaningless. If for 2 mins you stopped being so political and read what was written you would understand that there isn’t always a hidden agenda behind posts.
 
Apr 15, 2004
2,876
138
East Devon
No, Starmer’s speech went down well with those polled. I pointed to the fact that polls are meaningless as they don’t seem to have any bearing on elections. Boris’ results were not as good, yet he still smashed Labour in the election. It’s not that difficult to grasp for you or ‘Ave it.
Has anyone disagreed with that? I haven’t. Seems like we’re talking past each other.

Any poll results is ….errrr….. based on those polled isn’t it? Do opinion polls provide any indication of a future election result? If the question was “how are you going to vote tomorrow/ next week/ next month” – then yes it does, but with decreasing relevance the further away from the election. But if the question is “what did you think of that speech?” up to three years from any election then clearly not.

Does that make this poll pointless? No – if all you want is a snapshot of how a speech from the leader of the Labour party was received at this precise moment in time, and by implication how he is doing – then it’s quite interesting. That's all. No more, no less.

What are we arguing about again?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Guiri Green

Daz

Administrator
Staff member
Pasoti Donor
Sep 30, 2003
2,670
237
42
Has anyone disagreed with that? I haven’t. Seems like we’re talking past each other.

Any poll results is ….errrr….. based on those polled isn’t it? Do opinion polls provide any indication of a future election result? If the question was “how are you going to vote tomorrow/ next week/ next month” – then yes it does, but with decreasing relevance the further away from the election. But if the question is “what did you think of that speech?” up to three years from any election then clearly not.

Does that make this poll pointless? No – if all you want is a snapshot of how a speech from the leader of the Labour party was received at this precise moment in time, and by implication how he is doing – then it’s quite interesting. That's all. No more, no less.

What are we arguing about again?
You and I are not arguing about anything Ave it. I have merely posted that I don’t believe polls are worth looking at (now you may disagree with that and that is fine 👍). Our resident know everything though disagreed and then misrepresented the results of the poll. That is what I had an issue with.
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
Has anyone disagreed with that? I haven’t. Seems like we’re talking past each other.

Any poll results is ….errrr….. based on those polled isn’t it? Do opinion polls provide any indication of a future election result? If the question was “how are you going to vote tomorrow/ next week/ next month” – then yes it does, but with decreasing relevance the further away from the election. But if the question is “what did you think of that speech?” up to three years from any election then clearly not.

Does that make this poll pointless? No – if all you want is a snapshot of how a speech from the leader of the Labour party was received at this precise moment in time, and by implication how he is doing – then it’s quite interesting. That's all. No more, no less.

What are we arguing about again?
Exactly it is what it is , not meaningless, it was what random members of the public thought about it last night, but not indicative of how people will vote in 3 years time. Let's move on.
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
You and I are not arguing about anything Ave it. I have merely posted that I don’t believe polls are worth looking at (now you may disagree with that and that is fine 👍). Our resident know everything though disagreed and then misrepresented the results of the poll. That is what I had an issue with.
Mod reverts to name calling, again, I can take it but is it really necessary?
 
Jul 15, 2006
3,890
55
Kenton, Devon
Interesting YouGov poll results released this morning: Boris is struggling in a number of "red wall" seats, with them down an average of 10 points - enough to lose up to 32 of those seats (4 would definitely switch back to Labour, 14 "likely" to switch, and another 14 "too close to call"). And 54% disapproved of the Govt and felt they were badly handling the economy. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Northern red wall Tory MPs are getting more vocal in demanding to know what "levelling up" actually means, especially in light of the loss of the £20 p/w to Universal Credit, the rise in NI contributions, the rumoured rise in Council Tax next year to help cover social care, etc.

But that's pretty much as far as the good news goes for Labour: although on paper (according to that poll) they're potentially in line to claw back many of their voters they lost at the last election, they still can't get their noses ahead of the Tories (Tories 41% - Labour 40%) ... and that's because a sizeable chunk of those more centre-left Labour voters are more likely to vote Green (who have moved up 5 points in the poll).
 

Frank Butcher

Foodbank Donor
Oct 9, 2003
3,592
48
Gairloch
Interesting YouGov poll results released this morning: Boris is struggling in a number of "red wall" seats, with them down an average of 10 points - enough to lose up to 32 of those seats (4 would definitely switch back to Labour, 14 "likely" to switch, and another 14 "too close to call"). And 54% disapproved of the Govt and felt they were badly handling the economy. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Northern red wall Tory MPs are getting more vocal in demanding to know what "levelling up" actually means, especially in light of the loss of the £20 p/w to Universal Credit, the rise in NI contributions, the rumoured rise in Council Tax next year to help cover social care, etc.

But that's pretty much as far as the good news goes for Labour: although on paper (according to that poll) they're potentially in line to claw back many of their voters they lost at the last election, they still can't get their noses ahead of the Tories (Tories 41% - Labour 40%) ... and that's because a sizeable chunk of those more centre-left Labour voters are more likely to vote Green (who have moved up 5 points in the poll).
Which also suggests the gains are being made due to Tory decision making/ mismanagement as opposed to much of what Labour are actually doing. In this scenario, people tend to revert to type in an election as they don’t see an alternative to switch to.

this is a big opportunity for Labour but whether his speech was good or not, Starmer isn’t cutting through as he should be. Labour should really be well ahead at this point.
 

Frank Butcher

Foodbank Donor
Oct 9, 2003
3,592
48
Gairloch
Having just watched the Tony and Gordon documentary, it struck me how similar the situation is for Starmer to make Labour electable today. Trustworthiness on primarily the economy, but also Defence and law and order were massive issues for Labour back then. While some hard lefties would hate the prospect, moderation is probably the only way to gain power.

The battle to win hearts and minds is the same today, but does Labour have the brains of Brown, the charisma of Blair and the marketing nous of Mandelson to make it happen? Whatever we may think of any of them now, it was a powerful combination and I think that Labour of today needs something similar. Is it there though?

While I subscribe to mervyn’s held view that governments lose elections, there does need to be something to turn to. New Labour was all shiny and sparkly - this is the moment Labour have to make a dent in my opinion. Still behind in the polls with everything that’s happened/happening? It needs to change before the sweeteners emerge ahead of the next election.
 

signalspast

50/50 Sponsor
T.O Support
Aug 17, 2005
1,336
26
Having just watched the Tony and Gordon documentary, it struck me how similar the situation is for Starmer to make Labour electable today. Trustworthiness on primarily the economy, but also Defence and law and order were massive issues for Labour back then. While some hard lefties would hate the prospect, moderation is probably the only way to gain power.

The battle to win hearts and minds is the same today, but does Labour have the brains of Brown, the charisma of Blair and the marketing nous of Mandelson to make it happen? Whatever we may think of any of them now, it was a powerful combination and I think that Labour of today needs something similar. Is it there though?

While I subscribe to mervyn’s held view that governments lose elections, there does need to be something to turn to. New Labour was all shiny and sparkly - this is the moment Labour have to make a dent in my opinion. Still behind in the polls with everything that’s happened/happening? It needs to change before the sweeteners emerge ahead of the next election.
Agree but they would also need to get Scotland back to win an overall majority and cannot see that happening soon.
 
Nov 15, 2011
1,863
253
I think Labour has written off Scotland at least for now, Sturgeon has nabbed most Labour voters and until the Independence question is resolved that's not changing. After that Scotland might not even be around.

The way Starmer knows he can get a majority is working with the LibDem & Greens. That's around 50% of the electorate. My guess is that right up the GE he will hold the line that Labour can get a majority on its own, but if that doesn't appear to be the case on the day the other parties will work together like they did in Batley and Chesham. Corbyn wouldn't ever countenance this, but I do think Starmer will be more pragmatic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mike E