Quote: Chappers @ 26th June 2017, 9:29 PM

I'm not saying it's not true. Just that it doesn't mean anything. You can make anything up with statistics.

View original

Nothing manipulative about it, just saying Labour on average have done better than the Tories in the last six General Elections. As Labour had three big wins and the Tories only managed one small majority in any of these contests, this is hardly surprising. Yet one of you denied it while another said it was "bollocks" (which sounds like a denial to me) simply because they didn't like hearing it.
As the taxi driver said to Stewart Lee: "you can prove anything with facts can't you?"

Quote: Chris Hallam @ 27th June 2017, 6:40 AM

Nothing manipulative about it, just saying Labour on average have done better than the Tories in the last six General Elections.

View original

On average, animals have no legs. Surely what matters is that Tories have won more general elections?

They haven't!
This isn't complicated, honestly...

Broadcasters are almost as desperate to find funny Tories as they are to find funny women. But in the mean time there are quotas to be filled and Julia Hartley-Brewer regularly appears on HIGNFY.

Quote: Tursiops @ 27th June 2017, 11:38 AM

Broadcasters are almost as desperate to find funny Tories as they are to find funny women. But in the mean time there are quotas to be filled and Julia Hartley-Brewer regularly appears on HIGNFY.

View original

She's actually only been on once in the last seven years.

And the average number of legs people have in the UK is less than 2.

That's like saying the average of number of beans in a jar is not the highest number of beans in a jar.

"That's like saying the average of number of beans in a jar is not the highest number of beans in a jar."
This confuses me . It is, the highest number isn't it? My brain hurts.

"Surely what matters is that Tories have won more general elections?"
Have the Tories won more of the last six General Elections? No. Ignore averages. They haven't won more anyway.

Quote: Chris Hallam @ 27th June 2017, 12:13 PM

She's actually only been on once in the last seven years.

View original

It felt more often.

An average is what you are more likely to find. This is the trouble with statistics, it's all jargon.

Quote: Chris Hallam @ 27th June 2017, 2:56 PM

"Surely what matters is that Tories have won more general elections?"
Have the Tories won more of the last six General Elections? No. Ignore averages. They haven't won more anyway.

View original

They have won more of the last 3, more of the last 4, more of the last 5, more of the last 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14... ...

It's only if you conveniently take into account the last 6 they have not.

Stats, eh?

Generally true (If you count 2010 and 2017 as Tory wins).
Well done for at least understanding me! Some here clearly didn't.
Was originally just making the point that the Tory record in the last twenty years isn't that impressive. Only one outright majority in the past six elections and not a big one even then.
Historically, they were the most successful party electorally in the 20th century. I'm not disputing that, Labour also clearly didn't win this month either.
But there is some evidence, the Tories are slipping a bit. They've not won with a half way decent majority in 25 years. They've not won by a landslide in 30.

Quote: Chris Hallam @ 27th June 2017, 3:52 PM

Was originally just making the point that the Tory record in the last twenty years isn't that impressive. Only one outright majority in the past six elections and not a big one even then.

View original

I don't disagree. But you're missing out the important context, like where they were coming from previouisly; vote shares; actual numbers. What you are saying is not inaccurate, but it does lack the nuance of psephological analysis.

What do you mean?

Quote: Aaron @ 27th June 2017, 4:27 PM

What you are saying is not inaccurate, but it does lack the nuance of psephological analysis.

View original

You are right that you need to look at nuance when things are close such as a Tory win, but Labour landslides stand on their own, no need to gild that lily. Cameron's catastrophic gamble was swiftly followed by May's. Nuance won't cover up those catastrophes.