Gransnet forums

News & politics

Is the polling correct?

(34 Posts)
GracesGranMK3 Mon 25-Nov-19 09:04:37

Last time it certainly wasn't. Almost all polsters got it wrong in favour of the Tories - or was it positive Tory headlines? Is the same thing happening again? This is probably of more interest for those who enjoy statistics so don't worry if your not one of those people. It's a bit of a read but I thought it worth copying in full.

Why the Observer’s opinion polling is wrong
Posted on November 24 2019
This comment was posted by a regular contributor who uses the name DunGroanin' in response to my discussion of the Observer's reported 19% opinion poll lead for the Tories. I tho0ught it worth sharing as it offers what seems like an entirely plausible explanation as to why the lead may be overstated:

I spent a lot of time last election blowing major holes in their balls polls, especially the commissioned ones by Opinium for the Obsessive Groaniad. Also one of the reasons why I done with them.

I called it pretty correctly. By looking at their RAW data. And I say the current tory lead is exactly what it was at the end of 2017. If you believe their raw data.

This time I hadn’t bothered up till now. Drilling down into data is the key. Even as the representation of the data has changed… in my opinion they have manipulated raw data!

The Obsessives splash yesterday that claims a headline of
‘Conservatives open up 19-point lead with 47% share of the vote’
www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/23/tories-renewed-poll-boost-brexit-party-candidates-pull-out-opinium-observer

Now understand that there is a catch-up period by Labour as the election campaign proceeds and fair coverage in the media allows that. Last time that ended with the overall lead of 800,000 votes over the whole 650 seats by the tories.

‘Despite a drop in the number of seats, the Conservatives actually saw a rise in vote share (up 5.5% points to 42.4%). Labour’s vote share rose at an even greater rate (up 9.5% points) and now sits at 40.0%.’

data.london.gov.uk/blog/the-2017-general-election-the-numbers-behind-the-result/

www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2017/results

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES WAS 2.4%.

Remember that percentage – 2.4%.

Now lets drill down into the Opinium poll.

1. They state ‘Source: Opinium poll: 2,003 UK adults surveyed from 20 to 22 November 2019’ – that is 3 days over which the two thousand and three people were interviewed. Things were happening over these 3 days and doesn’t include the Friday debate.
2. In their new presentation of the data – www.opinium.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/VI-20-11-19-website.xlsx There are now multiple data sheets. The relevant sheet is 5a. It asks what the responders voted in 2017, of the number that are used to derive the headline ‘result’.
3. The actual number of responders who voted in 2017 is a total of 1,368.
4. Off these 46% (508) voted Tory and 36% (421) Labour in 2017 – a difference of 10% not the 2.4% of the actual result remember!
5. The actual 2017 Tory share was 42.4% not 46% as of the responders. The actual Labour share was 40% not 36% of the responders. Self selected responders, many who couldn’t even ‘remember’ how they voted 2 years ago btw (ahem!).
So the Tory share of responders is over represented by 7.6% (4)
6. Then let us look at sheet 3 & 3b which mutates the numbers even further. The first has tory 35% (558) , Lab 23% (372). The second has tory 37% (585) , 24% Lab (379) – both have a total respondents used as 1592.
So the magic trick is pulled! How does my point 6 compare to my point 4?

I put all that up there not expecting most to follow it but to show the ‘data’. It can be ignored and you can just take my opinion below or their opium from Opinium (a firm that should hang it’s head in shame – i believe).

————

So how many ways to skin this very thin cat?

The raw data adjusted for the 7.6% starting variance would give the Tories a current lead (to the 3 day period ending 22/11) of between 4.4% and 5.4%.

With undecideds of some 16%.

I am sticking to my prediction of a landslide based on how the numbers improved through the campaign last time.

Anyway the 19% HEADLINE current lead is balls!

Do we really need to wonder why such magical thinking is going on in the Obsessive Groaniad?

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2019/11/24/why-the-observers-opinion-polling-is-wrong/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+org%2FlWWh+%28Tax+Research+UK+2%29

Eloethan Mon 25-Nov-19 17:10:23

Sussexborn You complain in response to Gracesgran that "politeness and manners seem to be swept aside."

On this first page, there is reference to "a few gullible folk who will fall for Labour's idiotic spending proposals ......"

You yourself say:

"Oh dear GGMk3! How much time did you spend/waste on your (wo)mansplaining? It must be hard living in this world of wrong thinking morons!"

If you disagree with the analysis Gracesgran posted - and no doubt some will dispute it - why not concentrate on that analysis and point out where you believe it is faulty rather than make sarcastic comments?

As to your comment, based on the experience and opinion of one person, that life is much tougher in Nordic countries than is commonly reported -this extract from an article in the Telegraph in July 2018 relating to research carried out on living standards in various countries of the world:

"As is often the case in such rankings, Scandinavian countries dominate, with Finland leading the charge with an overall score of 90.09 out of 100. It scored highest on nutrition and basic medical care, access to basic knowledge, and personal rights.>...."

>.."Sussexborn You complain in response to Gracesgran that "politeness and manners seem to be swept aside.

On this first page, there is reference to "a few gullible folk who will fall for Labour' idiotic spending proposals ......" and you yourself say:

"Oh dear GGMk3! How much time did you spend/waste on your (wo)mansplaining? It must be hard living in this world of wrong thinking morons!"

If you disagree with the analysis Gracesgran posted, why not concentrate on that analysis and point out where it is faulty rather than make sarcastic comments?

As the comment made by your friend questioning the commonly reported finding that Nordic countries have the highest standard of living - this from The Telegraph in July 2018 re standard of living in various countries:

"As is often the case in such rankings, Scandinavian countries dominate, with Finland leading the charge with an overall score of 90.09 out of 100. It scored highest on nutrition and basic medical care, access to basic knowledge, and personal rights.

...."Others among the top 12 countries showing “very high social progress”, according to the study, were three more Nordic nations (Sweden in sixth place, Norway in seventh ..."

Eloethan Mon 25-Nov-19 17:11:48

Sorry, repeated in error.

Jane10 Mon 25-Nov-19 17:21:38

What may be a science to GG is an art to others. Including those with advanced qualifications in research methodologies, qualitative as well as quantitative.

Eloethan Mon 25-Nov-19 17:40:00

I don't quite understand what you mean Jane10. If people on here have advanced qualifications in research methodologies and dispute the details in her post, they should do so, rather than make snide remarks.

lemongrove Mon 25-Nov-19 20:38:49

Even if poll data is skewed, it won’t have any effect on how voters choose on the night ( in fact the vast majority choose their candidate almost from the time the GE is announced.)
Polls are an indicator, nothing more and won’t influence anyone.
Sometimes polls get things wrong ( the referendum) and sometimes although it seems one party is well ahead in the polls, by voting day things have changed.
Put Brexit into the mix and it makes for difficult polling.
On the face of it, the LP are in the best position, not ahead in the polls and unlikely to win on their own, but they can join the Lib Dems ( or form an alliance of some kind) ditto with the SNP.Whilst the Conservatives can’t do either of those things and need a majority, in fact a good majority to do what they need to do.
It’s all down to getting seats in previously LP areas.We won’t truly know how things are until the exit polls.

lemongrove Mon 25-Nov-19 20:42:25

I agree that the 19% Conservative lead ( in the OP) is rubbish.

Yehbutnobut Mon 25-Nov-19 22:59:59

Pseudo intellectual claptrap Jane any of us with a mere A level in Maths can understand statistics....you don’t need ‘advanced qualifications in research methodologies’ ?’

Amagran Tue 26-Nov-19 00:05:53

Thank you GracesGranMK3 for taking the time and trouble to provide such a meticulous examination of opinion poll raw data. It was very instructive - both for what your analysis revealed and for the flaws it exposed.

It is no wonder that opinion polls are so unreliable when some of those involved in conducting them believe that sample selection is an 'art'. Art: human creative skill or its application...…..creative activity concerned with the production of imaginative designs...
The fundamental tenet of sample selection, as with all other aspects of research in the physical, life and social sciences, is objectivity and systematic observation. Granted, samples for opinion polls must be representative, but their selection should still follow objective, scientific principles.