YouGov's accuracy
Mike Smithson, Editor of politicalbetting.com has this to say about YouGov's accuracy in predicting party leadership contests:
"YouGov have a brilliant record with Tory leadership battles getting the result to within one point in both 2005 and 2001.
In 2007 the firm overstated Nick Clegg’s lead over Chris Huhne - but got the outcome right.
Also that year they were not too bad with the first choices of party members in the deputy race and that poll took place more than a month beforehand."
posted by Luke Akehurst at 4:33 pm
7 Comments:
In the 2007 Labour leadership race- fought under the same rules- YG called it confidently for Son-of-Benn.
He finished fourth.
5:10 pm, September 12, 2010
The poll you refer to did overestimate Benn's support but it was incredibly accurate in predicting AJ and Harriet's votes.
6:58 pm, September 12, 2010
AJ and HH !
I thought this comment was about YG's 'skill' as predicting the winner weeks before the result was announced? You used the Tory and LD leadership elections as examples.
For Labour- and the system it uses- they have been way off mark as I pointed out.
Furthermore as UKPR points out in its commentary, it is in effect impossible to predict second preferences with any degree of statistical confidence.
YG tells us that the race has narrowed since July.....well what a surprise !
There have also been a couple of primaries of actual members!
7:25 pm, September 12, 2010
YouGov didnt get the TU section down very in 2007 - party members yes, but not TU members.
1:11 am, September 13, 2010
As Mike Smithson points out today, there will be a lot of people in this polled who have already voted - it's part opinion poll, part exit poll. That is why I think it will prove very accurate indeed.
In particular, YouGov have said:
'Another unknown is turnout, but notably over 40% of those polled said they had already voted, and these respondents were more likely to back Ed Miliband. With the MPs second preferences unknown and the two candidates within the margin of error it really could go either way, but Ed Miliband is now in poll position.'
http://today.yougov.co.uk/politics/neck-and-neck
Very significant.
11:43 am, September 13, 2010
Another wake up call by Mike Smithison:
“.. David is the choice of those at the top of the party, who are keen to return to power. Alone, he has talked about rebuilding the coalition that won the party three election victories from 1997. His handicap is that this tags him as the Blairite choice. So his willingness to admit Labour must have its own ideas about reshaping the state has been tempered by an anxiety not to offend party activists.
Ed, the younger Miliband, who could yet win as everybody’s second choice, has offered mostly mush – policies and promises calculated to make the party feel good about itself and about his candidacy. Few of the voters who deserted Labour at the election will be persuaded by a declaration that he was against the Iraq war.
By choosing David Miliband, Labour would be saying it wanted to win back England’s aspirant classes – that it was still serious about power. But the party’s heart could yet rule its head. Mr Clegg – and Mr Cameron – are cheering on the younger of the two brothers”.
I think that Parker has got this one right and if it goes according to the YouGov poll then Nick and Dave will have cause to celebrate.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2010/09/14/is-edm-the-choice-of-nick-and-dave/
11:09 pm, September 14, 2010
Interestingly, only David Milliband has spoken out against widepsread industrial action, something Labour condemned when in office but now seem to be supporting. Does this mean that all the other leadership candidates are going down the Bob Crow road. Heaven help the country and the Labour party if this is the case.
2:55 pm, September 15, 2010
Post a Comment
<< Home