Brexit.

[Innula Zenovka]

Fuck.



Corbyn: Brexit would go ahead even if Labour won snap election

Yes, but that's his policy *if* Labour win a GE -- in which, it should be remembered, about two thirds of Labour MPs will be defending their seats in constituencies that voted Leave.

It tells us nothing about what happens when (rather than if) the EU reject the unicorns for all Jobs First Brexit he says he wants to renegotiate by the end of March.

Nor does it tell us what happens if he finds himself unable to command a parliamentary majority without the support of the SNP, the Lib Dems and/or Plaid Cymru, and neither -- most importantly, since it's now looking like the most likely outcome by far -- does it tell us what Labour's policy is if and when Theresa May's Withdrawal Agreement is rejected by Parliament but, nevertheless, she survives a No Confidence vote when Labour (or someone else) moves it.

I have very little time for Corbyn but on this occasion -- because some Labour MPs whom I do respect have reassured me and other Labour Party activists on this point -- I'm prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt as least for as long as Keir Starmer remains Labour's shadow Brexit secretary.

Labour certainly don't expect (nor do they want to) fight a General Election in the near future, and certainly not on the issue of Brexit. Since the Tories don't want to, either, that leads me to think it's not that likely to happen.

So I am prepared to wait, admittedly with some misgivings and anxiety, to see how things turn out over the next few weeks. Not of course, that I can do much else, but I still think there's everything to play for.

 

[Kara Spengler]

I still dont understand your argument:

You say YouGov uses online-research for their surveys and this is not as good as other methods (phone-calls or random-questions in the street..)
reading yourr post one could think, the problem is, who finds the Questionnaire, who knows that there is a survey, Some ppl might accidently find it. But only very few. Sure this would be far from representativ.
But this online research is done with a Panel, A Panel is a group of people of say we 10.000 or similar in this case so. peeople which are registred with the Opinion Pollster, YoGov or other similiar institutions are asking repeately these people over a long time
So they have a lot of data already of these persons and can exactly do what you say is the difficulty: the can build a sample of people according to criterions like age, occupation educational achievment, voter of labour, UkIP etc , undecided voter, living in a small, big city, countryside, other factors too they might think they are important for the subject ...it still stays difficult, but you can look or try to check, which factor might be important...
And I am realy sure, they prepare such interviews for example with checking questionaire with people before they start the survey in Pre-tests

the other methods of questioning makes it much more difficult if not impossible to build such a stratified sample
asking people in the streets you will have to ask many many people in many different parts of the country to get something what could be representativ., because in this way, you lack of information to pick up people in the streets is not building a sample at least if you will make statements about for example who will vote for the Tories.
besides you cant get all the information about the person, a panel provides, if you ask only once. Most people will not accept to be asked forhours.
and a Panel has the big advantage to recognize much easier developments , movements, : for example where do disapponted labour-voters tend to go: to which other parties or will they not vote next time etc.

What I read that more and more opinion-poll-institutions resign from research via phone-calls, cause of the poor response, More and more ppl dont accept to be called by phone

So as more as I think about it, as more I see the advantages of this method : a panel onlime-research..

I remember I once have been part of a panel, where the subject was to give opinions, judgements concerning movies, A movie-distributor liked to find out reactions of us, t0 bring the movie better to market.
And the project-director told us after some time, he was astonished how good that panel forecasted reactions of the movie-interested audience and at last the commercial success
Certainly not because we all were so great. I think just the method offers some chances, of course it has limitations..and always it needs researchers who know about the limitations and the chances

Different methods of collecting data will each skew your results. Contacting people online only skews towards people with disposable income. Calls skew older. Mailing skews towards people that do not automatically throw out anything that looks like spam. On and on it goes. Even drawing names at random and physically visiting them skews the results. You need a variety of methods.

There is no one good methodology. If there were everyone (that wanted to be taking seriously) would use it. There are plenty of ways to get it wrong though.

 

[Essence Lumin]

There is no one good methodology. If there were everyone (that wanted to be taking seriously) would use it. There are plenty of ways to get it wrong though.

My recollection may be wrong but I seem to remember reading of one current difficulty. That being it used to be that a good way of polling was to call random numbers of peoples' phones. It is illegal to call cell phones though for polling questions. Now that land lines make up a much smaller and older percentage of the population it is not a reliable method.

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

That's the theory but, in practice, are YouGov's polling results notably out of line with those obtained by polling companies using more traditional methods? When they are, and when the results can be tested against reality (as in elections), are YouGov's results generally more or less accurate than those of their competitors?

I ask because I don't know, though my impression is that they're generally in line with their competitors, at least on UK political issues (you can compare the results from all UK polling companies at UK Polling Report).

They were often enough, of course they improved, but I still don't trust their method entirely for all type of questions. The thing is that

a) the press just won't tell you,
b) since they are quite much cheaper than the rest of opinion research companies they are producing tons of polls, where you will never get polls from the competition, and publish them, so the competition if there was any might be much, much older and incomparable.

Another thing regarding public polls, which normally the press doesn't explain, is the confidence interval being used. This applies to all public research.

The confidence interval means that the pollsters want to be sure, that at least 95% of the real level of support in the whole population is being captured in the sample range. This always means that pollster's results do contain a certain margin of error. Sadly the margin of error in points connected with a poll is rarely being mentioned in the press.

YouGov is a British phenomenon; in the USA there is no such a thing, there they still do trust normal opinion research companies only.

Trump says 'negative polls' are 'fake news' — here's what you can and cannot trust

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

In the meantime the Irish government still refrains from doing any kind of preparations for a hard brexit which means implementing a border between RoI and NI again.

The reasoning: we are better off with waiting for the vote in January; otherwise already preparing for a border might become a self fulfilling prophecy.

Google Translate

 

[Innula Zenovka]

YouGov is a British phenomenon; in the USA there is no such a thing, there they still do trust normal opinion research companies only.

YouGov's US site: YouGov | What the world thinks

If you look at the bottom of the page, you will see they operate in several different countries

 

[Free]

Snap?

 

[Kara Spengler]

My recollection may be wrong but I seem to remember reading of one current difficulty. That being it used to be that a good way of polling was to call random numbers of peoples' phones. It is illegal to call cell phones though for polling questions. Now that land lines make up a much smaller and older percentage of the population it is not a reliable method.

Pretty much. There is also a much bigger problem that the portion with land line phones (which you can call unless, like in the US, they are on a donotcall registry) tends to skew much older.

 

[Essence Lumin]

Pretty much. There is also a much bigger problem that the portion with land line phones (which you can call unless, like in the US, they are on a donotcall registry) tends to skew much older.

Yes, I said that though.

 

[Khamon]

You have to be really careful when snapping together one of those portable laundry trolleys. They’re quite convenient but a piece misplaced is difficult to adjust once attached. All is well, though; it is assembled.

 

[Pamela]

 

[Kara Spengler]

You have to be really careful when snapping together one of those portable laundry trolleys. They’re quite convenient but a piece misplaced is difficult to adjust once attached. All is well, though; it is assembled.

The right ones are actually pretty good. The plastic ones are eww though, hopefully you got one that is metal and meant for shopping.

 

[Daniel Voyager]

What's everyone's predictions for 2019 for Brexit ?

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

The only thing I am sure about is - if Brexit, no matter if hard or soft happens - that the UK is utterly unprepared for its consequences, and some are in for a very drastic wake up call what it really means for all, while people like Farage by then will have left to France, enjoying their EU pensions.

All other stuff is really hard to predict, given the fact that the politicians are behaving so irrational and unpredictable, that even the good old Mad magazine would be unable to come up with a parody, because reality has become the ultimate satire itself.

 

[Sid]

What's everyone's predictions for 2019 for Brexit ?

The British politics are totally unpredictable for me at the moment, so I don't really have a clue.
My gut feeling is that they are stupid enough to go for a no-deal.

And that will leave, apart from shrinking the European (and therefor probably the world) economy for years, two really hot irons in the fire: The Irish border with Northern Ireland and the fishing rights in the North sea.
There have been wars triggered for less in the past.

 

[Chin Rey]

What's everyone's predictions for 2019 for Brexit ?

I predict there will be chaos.

There is of course a chance that the parliament will accept May's deal but it's not very likely and then the timeline will be:

• 14th January: The parliament rejects May's deal.
• 15th January - 25th March: Much ado about nothing as politicians desperately try to come up with some alternative deal. Heads will probably roll and/or explode but none of that makes any difference.
• 26th March: It finally dawns on the Uk that time is running out and they are completely unprepared for a hard Brexit. Whoever is in charge at that time contacts EU and demands more time.
• 27th March: EU rejects the demand.
• 28th March: Whoever is in charge in Uk asks EU for time to hold a second referendum.
• 29th March: just in the nick of time EU agrees to postpone Brexit 6 months to give Uk time to prepare and hold a second referendum.
• 30th March-27th October: British politicians while away the days, complaining and arguing how the referendum shold be held.
• 28th October: Still not ready neither for a referendum or a hard Brexit, the British government demands that EU gives them more time.
• 29th October: EU rejects the demand and hard Brexit hits a totally unprepared Uk over night.

Or maybe they'll actually get around to holding a referendum in time. We'll see.

 

[Kara Spengler]

What's everyone's predictions for 2019 for Brexit ?

That no matter what happens donnie will claim he could have got a better deal.

 

[Sid]

That no matter what happens donnie will claim he could have got a better deal.

Yes, that is a certainty.
But who knows, his leadership may even end before March 29, 2019.
Some indicators that I see in my crystal ball indicate that could happen soon now.

 

[Kara Spengler]

Yes, that is a certainty.
But who knows, his leadership may even end before March 29, 2019.
Some indicators that I see in my crystal ball indicate that could happen soon now.

Unfortunately whenever he leaves he will undoubtedly break with the tradition of an orderly transfer of power and dupe his followers into practically starting a civil war over it. The only question is if they are successful in causing one or someone stops it fast.

 

[Tigger]

What's everyone's predictions for 2019 for Brexit ?

May's deal is rejected.
Demands are made for re-negotiation in spite of having already been told no renegotiations are possible.
Corbyn continues to wish really hard for a general election that he wont get.
As time gets close to running out Corbyn will try for a vote of no confidence, which will fail as an election would take us through the default brexit date.
May refuses to contemplate a referendum with remain as an option & tries to push for a referendum between her rejected vote and no deal.
Time runs out, may rejects the idea of withdrawing article 50, her attempts to extend article 50 deadline fail as there is no real potential for anything to change.
May drives us all off of a cliff edge, as the ports choke and airports fall silent May resigns leading to a poison-chalice Tory leadership contest that no one really wants to win and possibly a general election which just returns a bigger split than ever before and a situation where entrenched positions make any kind of coalition impossible between the largest parties. Labour refusing a deal with Tories and Progressive parties refusing a deal with pro-brexit parties (Tory/Labour)
Uk slides into no deal chaos with no government.