Kemp Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Name your price young man. How much can you afford to lose? http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/297729-stv-poll-labour-would-annihilated-if-general-election-held-tomorrow/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barney Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 How much can you afford to lose? http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/297729-stv-poll-labour-would-annihilated-if-general-election-held-tomorrow/ sadly it won't be tomorrow and the next big scare story will be that if you don't vote labour, then the tories will definitely get in. That will sway some of the electorate who believe in tactical voting as opposed to a party who you believe in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Naw, ye wurnae being whooshed. I made a stupid typo. (Distracted before what proved to be a mean dental appointment. ) Sorry. I meant BST in winter and BST+1 in summer. SDST, which was what I meant in referring to our European allies (France, Germany, mainland Spain). There are compelling reasons in its favour and I do think now that Scotland (in the shape of Fruitcake) wants weirdly devolved powers for the home nations, England and Wales will see sense in adopting it. I would prefer BST in the winter . The clocks going to GMT was so that the weans don't go to school in the dark but in about a month from now , they will go to school in the dark , anyway. I think the fermers were a consideration once too but shull would just say , f**k the fermers. . Personally , l don't think it will change as it has been talked about now for about 10yrs and nothing occurred . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 How much can you afford to lose? http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/297729-stv-poll-labour-would-annihilated-if-general-election-held-tomorrow/ For the SNP to get 30 or more seats I'd be happy with any figure you like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 The Bradley effect is specifically about non-white candidates running against white candidates and therefore has no relevance here. A margin of error, as usually calculated, is applied to specific percentages and not to the percentage difference. Therefore, the final result was not out-with a poll of 52-48 with a 3% margin of error. The polls are shown as 2 significant figures (so could be between 51.6 to 52.4 and 47.6 to 48.4 if they had been shown to 3 significant figures as the actual result was) and therefore 55.3% and 44.7% (or 55% and 45% if you want to go the opposite way and reduce the actual result to 2 significant figures) is actually at the bounds of the margin of error, not out-with it. EDIT: This discussion should be on the Referendum thread. The point about the Bradley affect is that it's people telling pollsters they're voting one way, but actually voting the other. This happened during the referendum. The were no polls in the last 2 weeks which were near the final result, they all over estimated YES.That's why so many YES voters thought they had a chance ( ). It is ironic in a way. Throughout the campaign the YES voters were saying the polls are wrong the polls are wrong, conspiracy etc etc. They were right, the polls were wrong. The polls were showing YES to be far closer than it ever was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 We may all be maddies but, for sure, Fruitcake is NOT a socialist, as I know them. She is a Nationalist. Her initials are a clue to this. FFS you have no business questioning anyone's intelligence with puerile comments like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomsbury Bud Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 The polls were pretty accurate about the referendum, in the final week: http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/09/well-polls/ It might not be the Bradley effect, but there did seem to a late tip towards 'no'. I've got my doubts the SNP can get 52% in the general election; like it or not Labour has a big campaign machine and that's not in action right now but it will be in action in the run up to the General Election Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isle Of Bute Saint Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 sadly it won't be tomorrow and the next big scare story will be that if you don't vote labour, then the tories will definitely get in. That will sway some of the electorate who believe in tactical voting as opposed to a party who you believe in.TopCat will be one he falls for every Westminster scary story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 TopCat will be one he falls for every Westminster scary story You should stick to false quoting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TediousTom Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Terry Kelly should put himself up to replace her...please! Christ almighty, Terry Kelly...is he still fettering around indulging in his own self importance and doing nothing to dispel the smell of corruption hanging over Renfewshire Labour? He had a councillor pal called Manser...did he not get the jail? I fell out of love with Labour some years ago, I despise them now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Yes, I'll take you up on that. Make it a biggie! With Murphy as leader the STV figures might not be far wrong. Edited October 30, 2014 by FTOF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Make it a biggie! With Murphy as leader the STV figures might not be far wrong. You can join in aswell if you like? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 You can join in aswell if you like? I donate more than enough to my chosen charities thank you. P.S. You don't need a question mark in your sentence. It's not a question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) I donate more than enough to my chosen charities thank you. P.S. You don't need a question mark in your sentence. It's not a question. Haha... No need to try deflect away from you shitting yourself, everyone seen it If you're so confident of course, you won't be donating anything more to charity. Unless your point is that you donate so much to your chosen charities, that they wouldn't want a donation from myself? Edited October 30, 2014 by TopCat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Haha... No need to try deflect away from you shitting yourself, everyone seen it If you're so confident of course, you won't be donating anything more to charity. Unless your point is that you donate so much to your chosen charities, that they wouldn't want a donation from myself? "Saw" it. Not "seen" it, dullard. I think my point is, that you're a fanny of the highest order. Also,we all know who really shat themselves recently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) "Saw" it. Not "seen" it, dullard. I think my point is, that you're a fanny of the highest order. Also,we all know who really shat themselves recently. Your absolutely rattled here hm?You should correct that to you're, then give me some more personal abuse, that will help your credibility. I think you're implying I shat it, do elaborate? I'm certainly not the one egging on a fellow fan to take a bet that I'm not willing to take myself. Edited October 30, 2014 by TopCat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Scottish Labour Gala Dinner tonight at Central Hotel in Glasgow. I actually wish I was at it, just this once Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) No! The point about the Bradley effect is that it applies specifically to non-whites running against whites. Whether or not it is also about what people tell pollsters is neither here nor there. There are other "effects" which are specifically about other things, for example women v men. No doubt there will be one arising from the referendum, it will probably be called the "f**king Lying Unionist Bastards Effect" - FLUBE for short - and will hurry along normality nicely, thanks. Well, no.http://www.thelondoneconomic.com/2014/09/08/will-scotland-vote-yes-for-independence/ There's one of several articles which cites the Bradley effect in relation to the Scottish referendum. Whereas the Bradley effect term did start as people saying they'd vote for a black candidate, but actually voting for a white one. It has since became the term for people saying they're doing one thing to pollsters while actually intending on doing the other. Edited October 30, 2014 by TopCat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Scottish Labour Gala Dinner tonight at Central Hotel in Glasgow. I actually wish I was at it, just this once Deputy Leader Anus Sarwar resigns at the gala dinner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 Are you telling me that because some f**king idiot journalist doesn't know what the Bradley effect is, then that should change what it actually is? It is specifically about non-whites running against whites. Is that big enough for you to read? Anyone who uses it out of that context is wrong to do so. You're the one that told someone to Google it, why not take your own advice before you continue digging. You know what, I'll do it for you:- The Bradley effect, less commonly called the Wilder effect is a theory proposed to explain observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in some United States government elections where a white candidate and a non-white candidate run against each other The Bradley Effect is a phenomenon characterized by the tendency of non-white political candidates to perform better in opinion polls than they do in actual elections when they are running against white candidates The Bradley effect, less commonly called the Wilder effect, is a theory proposed to explain observed discrepancies between voter opinion polls and election outcomes in some elections where a white candidate and a minority candidate run against each other That is the first line from each of the first 3 articles when you Google "Bradley effect" - I've even taken the trouble to link them. Now put your f**king "digging implement" away. (I was going to say spade but, due to the subject matter, I thought it might be inappropriate) You've really got yourself in a state here, haven't you? Relax, it's just a term. If people like myself and numerous others want to use it in relation to the Scottish referendum we can. I know what it means when I read it, and so do others. Language evolves, no need to get so worked up about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) FFS, are you Dorothy? You're f**king acting like him - can't admit when you get something wrong. You were the one telling someone to go Google it as if you were some knowledgeable bastard and they were the stupid one - all you've done is prove you are as thick as Dickson. Language does evolve but at this time the Bradley effect is not what you claim it to be. For language to evolve it has to be by the consensus of a large(ish) part of a/the population - not you and a thick journalist. I didn't get anything wrong. The Bradley effect has been used several times in relation to the Scottish referendum by numerous journalists, bloggers, commentators.Here's another one from the Washington Post, one of the most respected newspapers in the world: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/09/12/something-extraordinary-is-happening-in-scotland/ It even goes on to refer to 'Bradley voters', although seems to think they're going to vote yes strangely. Your point seems to be that they're all wrong and you're right. You've also got yourself into a seething mess and stamped your feet about it. Relax. Edited October 30, 2014 by TopCat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 From your link But there is also the well-known “Bradley Effect,” where survey respondents are unwilling to admit that they will vote against black politicians. It can lead pollsters to paint too rosy a picture of support for black candidates. And it doesn't call them 'Bradley voters', it calls them 'bradley' voters - there's a huge difference. So, like Dickson, you supply links which disprove your argument. Are you sure you're not Dorothy? Keep back pedalling, you're going to get there. What a state to get yourself into. Also, who the f**k is Dorothy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 It looks like you are. Where's the back-peddling? You're f**king deluded. Like my replies to Dorothy, you should read my replies to you in a condescending tone to get the full effect. I'm sitting here laughing at you, not getting myself into a state. Give us another swearing diatribe about how you're not bothered about all this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 (edited) Lamont resigned last Friday and since then Sarwar has spent this week telling us he didn't want leaders job but was staying on as deputy...tonight he resigns. Either he hates Murphy or he took one for the team so that the leader and deputy aren't both mps. Edited October 30, 2014 by TPAFKATS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopCat Posted October 30, 2014 Report Share Posted October 30, 2014 You'll find swearing in (probably) about 50% of my posts. I tend to put swear words in my posts where I would if I was talking - I tend to swear a lot. It doesn't mean that I'm losing it. Now stop changing the subject and admit you're wrong about the Bradley Effect. But I wasn't wrong. I can link to several others if you want. You're struggling badly here. It's not your fault that the use of terms evolve. You shouldn't get yourself so angsty at it. Let it go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.