Wednesday, July 22, 2015

The only thing the Labour leadership contest is now missing is "The Vow"

I've been having a look at the datasets for YouGov's Labour leadership poll showing Jeremy Corbyn in the lead, and the most interesting thing is that the results have been weighted by recalled vote from the 2010 leadership election.  That's important, because last time around YouGov conducted a poll that wrongly showed party members backing Ed Miliband - in the end, it was David Miliband who won comfortably in the members' section of the electoral college.  Sure enough, the raw unweighted sample of today's poll has Ed Miliband ahead in the recalled vote, so it's pretty clear that a significant adjustment was required.  What remains to be seen is whether the crude act of reweighting to the actual 2010 result is sufficient, because the two Milibands don't have direct counterparts in this year's election.  Could there be a particular 'type' of Ed Miliband supporter who is still over-represented?

One thing that does add to the credibility of the poll is the fact that the vast bulk of the weighted sample are actual Labour members, and even those people put Corbyn well ahead on first preferences - although they do produce a dead-heat between Corbyn and Burnham in the final run-off.

On the other hand, a possible flaw is that there are roughly equal numbers of men and women in the weighted sample, which may not reflect the real shape of Labour's internal electorate.  Corbyn is doing significantly better among women (he's 51-49 behind Burnham among men in the run-off), so if female members and registered supporters are over-represented in the sample, the result should be a little closer.

As I speculated last night, it's actually fairly close between Cooper and Burnham in the race to avoid elimination after Liz Kendall's votes are redistributed, with Burnham just surviving by a 29% to 26% margin - well within the poll's claimed margin of error.  As it turns out, though, Corbyn only does slightly better on lower preferences from Burnham supporters than he does from Cooper supporters, so the identity of his final opponent may not make much difference to his chances of winning, unless the race is ultra-tight.

There's been speculation today that the impact of this poll may in itself change the final outcome, in the same way that the famous YouGov poll during the independence referendum completely changed the dynamics of the campaign, and in an unhelpful way for Yes.  We're already seeing the equivalent of the "shock and awe" campaign being directed at Corbyn over the last few hours, so that only leaves one question to be answered.  When can we expect "The Vow"?

10 comments:

  1. Isn't there an issue with past vote weighting if (as has been suggested) many David Miliband supporters left the party during Ed's leadership?

    ReplyDelete
  2. What are the dates, James? Before the mass abstention on welfare? If so, do you think the outlook could be different than this poll suggests?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It ran from Friday to yesterday. So it was mostly before the welfare vote, but not entirely.

      Delete
  3. Haven/;t they already vowed that, should Corbyn win, they will stage another leadership competition before Christmas?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An MP said that anonymously, but they could be just mouth. It'd be an uncharacteristically bold move for a party which meekly sat back and allowed the unpopular Brown to take over unopposed.

      Delete
    2. Not sure if it's still the case, but the rules last time I was aware of them were that you elect the Labour Leader at every annual conference, in reality this usually happens by default as they are unopposed.

      So a challenge is certainly possible, but given it would create a massive internal schism I can't see it happening unless JC drops a clanger or party discipline goes completely to hell.

      Delete
    3. http://www.itv.com/news/story/2015-07-22/burnham-labour-needs-to-come-to-its-senses-over-corbyn/

      They seem to have decided that it's a possibility nonetheless.

      Delete
    4. "or party discipline goes completely to hell."

      The Blairites and Brownites are not exactly famous for giving a shit about party discipline and it would be a surprise to see them start TBH.

      Delete
  4. The Blairite panic and westmisnter bubble handwringing would likely be far more troubling to Corbyn were it not that so many of those doing the shrieking assured the Labour party that the amusingly hopeless Kendall was their sure-fire way to electoral success.

    As it is, those running about like headless chickens in the PLP and the press are sounding every bit as batshit crazy as "no brainer" McTernan. (over an anti-austerity candidate who opposes wasting £100 Billion on trident and going to war in yet more dumb as fuck middle east quagmires - the Stalinist!! LOL ) That kind of amusing spectacle might, just might, NOT be the best way to persuade those Labour grass roots to the westminster establishment view that Corbyn is the lunatic here. Quite the reverse.

    For that matter lining up the most deranged of the Blairite sycophants in the press to lecture Labour members on what's best for party unity, after well over a decade of Blair Brown infighting, may not actually be that bright an idea either.

    It's about as sensible as listening to the tory party on that subject as their inevitable chaotic split over being a pro-Europe party or not creeps closer and closer by the day.

    Not to say it isn't entertaining though. Watching the same ignorant fools who got it so wrong on Iraq making a twat of themselves yet again will always be good value.

    Perhpas Kendall could make a VOW to find all of Tony's weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? It would at least be more 'inspiring' than vowing to abstain from the political process altogether like the leadership lightweights have done over welfare.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Refreshing statement of fact from the perspective of US site todayifoundout.com

    England=Just the part of the island that is England

    ReplyDelete