I think you're making a mistake which is judging the quality of the recording that a particular person made. I've got 2005 in a much higher quality than the one on here, and indeed all the way back to 1992. It's just because the person recording it didn't tune in their TV/video properly, or used a poor quality DVD/video to record it.
it's due to the 2005 exit poll being recorded via VCR while the 2010 poll is likely screencasted from a livestream if a BBC archive of the 2005 footage exists, then it would likely much clearer than this VHS recording shown here
@@ajs41 um... no? its massively superior in ways other than the quality of the recording (widescreen, hd, aesthetics of the studio, quality of the graphics etc.), what a pointless pseudointellectual comment
@@veggie42 Dave braIn-dead Nobhead No bloody wonder hIs Son Dead hIs LIttle Un-Cared Left Left In The Pub That why hIs 1-Leg Dad Dead havIn PIgafhIle ShaggIn Dave Round , hIs Mummy Stuffed If he hadnt Lyed about her memory Trouble
BBC Exit poll 1992-2019 1945PM 1.6.24 it isn't me begging to be indulged - with a touch of nostalgia, cos nostalgia's crap. it's me knowing full well that election night was far more interesting back then circa 1980/95.... men in suits might be the thing but a bit of idealogical werewithall is what it was all about... a labour red wash during thid election might allow his nibs to take a chance on a few ideas and actually get soemthing done. as opposed to the stifling b.s of party lines being towed... we shall see.
@@aclark903 Comments on ‘BBC Exit poll 1992-2019’ 0959am 2.6.24 reform lost it's reason to be after allowing those it was pitted against join it's ranks... greens wont do much.... and the same old merry go round of b.s will take centre stage - again - so eager beaver journos will have something to chat about sunday morning... with or without andrew neil.
2005 I was 1 year old, in 2019 I was 14 and this year I’m turning 17, next election (assuming they don’t call an early election) I’ll be 20 years old and be able to vote, it’s amazing how in just 4 election cycles (excluding the early ones) a whole generation grows up from little innocent babies in their mothers arms to being adults, able to drive, vote, drink, get married, have a house and kids etc... all in just 4 elections. 5 years did always seem a big gap to me, I think 3 years would be more appropriate but hey ho.
@@tobeytransport2802 you can still vote in local elections prior to the 2024 one. In terms of an early election there is literally 0 chance of that happening. Early elections do not get called when the leading party has an 80 seat majority. The only possible way for it to happen is if the Conservative party splits into 2 different factions which would challenge the PM's leadership but that's even more unlikely. Those sort of things don't happen in modern British politics. Or the PM with an 80 seat majority somehow loses a vote of no confidence.
@@kb4903 overall vote percentage doesn’t really matter in first past the post. It’s whoever gets the most votes. And because multiple parties stand candidates, winning 50% is nearly impossible. There was a constituency in Northern Ireland in 2015 where the MP won with just 27% of the vote.
Can’t believe all the hours of my life I’ve spent watching these videos and thinking about what ‘the next exit poll moment’ will be like - and they just come and go in a flash every few years.
@@a.demifemiflapo5795 likely but no guarantee. The local results last year looked eerily like those of 1992 and thus year resembled very closely those of 1993.
Main lesson from this is that Labour, Tory and SNP benefit the most out of FPTP. Gain plenty of seats without having a massive percentage lead in terms of vote.
@@TinyStixMusicChannel Yes. But they still benefit out of FPTP. Because in 2019, they got less than half of the (Scottish) votes, but most of the seats. I’m not trying to criticise the SNP, by the way. I’m just criticising FPTP.
I think Labour has actually lost out the last few elections because of FPTP. If the seats actually matched the votes I think Labour would have a much easier time forming a government than the Tories would. Sure Labour would likely never be able to govern alone again but I think they'd have been the largest party in a coalition much more often
@@YCFCfollower Labour had 262 seats in 2017 on about a 40% share of the vote. If anything, they were punished by FPTP in 2015 with the near-wipeout in Scotland meaning a net loss of seats despite recovering slightly (+1.4%) in their popular vote share from 2010.
@@CaradhrasAiguo49 Yeah, I meant they were screwed in 2017 because they only got a couple of % (votes) lower than Tories yet c.50 less seats. Obviously you’re right about 2015 too!
I went from 11 to 38 over the same period. I vaguely remember 1992, having had my first political epiphany two years earlier when my school teacher came into the classroom and announced that Mrs Thatcher had resigned as PM. She had been PM for my whole life, so it was a surprise to me that she could just go like that and it was the first time that I started really noticing that Government is formed by political parties winning elections, and PMs gain their office by leading those parties to victory. As a child, Margaret Thatcher had always seemed to me like another character on TV - a celebrity with a job running the country - and after her, John Major seemed like a dull person, fitting my stereotypical impression of a bank manager more than a Prime Minister. (My jaw hit the floor decades later when I realised that he had in fact been a banker at one time in his life.) The fact that he carried on as PM after 1992 left me nonplussed, but seeing Neil Kinnock replaced by John Smith was another moment of political education for me - apparently, because he didn't win, he had to resign and give someone else a chance. By 1997, I was the same age you are now and wiser in the ways of the world. I can remember how Tony Blair's landslide shook the country: to so many it was an exhilarating event and the sense of sweeping change that would lead to a new future was almost tangible, though some of my Conservative-minded friends were disappointed and didn't like Blair's Cheshire-cat grin.... 2001 and 2005 left me feeling nonplussed again; I didn't vote for Labour but it seemed inevitable that they would win those elections no matter how one voted. 2005 was more notable insofar as it saw things shifting away from Blair's favour: disillusionment over his approach to Afghanistan and Iraq, and his cosiness with President Bush, certainly took the bloom off the rose for many that had put their faith in him 8 years before. 2010 was a result that interested me and which I felt reasonably positive about. By that time I was clear in my mind that I am a moderate liberal at heart, so it pleased me to see Liberal Democrats having a shot at being in government, albeit as minor partners in a Conservative-led agenda. I was disappointed by both parties in the end and switched my vote in 2015, so you can imagine my disappointment in that year's result, especially as the exit poll turned out to have underestimated the Conservatives' numbers. 2017 struck me as a relief in some respects and a disappointment in others. Likewise 2019. I wonder what 2024's exit poll will look like, assuming an election doesn't happen before then? By that time, a new generation will be entitled to have its say - so who can tell what will result?
@@henryficklin3333 I can’t speak for the other guy, but as another 16 year old I can say that most people my age only took notice of politics around the 2015 election
@@benlewis1087 It was the brexit referendum for me in 2016, nobody I knew had parents who wanted to leave and I though that represented most of the population, it came as a shock to me when we left
And now that they've spent the 2010's making themselves unelectable, I'm afraid that labour landslides are a thing of the past. Dammit Miliband, you fucked it up
I remember the John Major victory very well. When the actual results started coming in and it was obvious the exit poll was wrong and that the Tories were going to get a majority it took the BBC several hours before they admitted their precious poll was wrong!
2015 was an unbelievable night, all the discussion in the weeks and months running up was "we may never see a majority for one Party ever again" (The Lib Dems had it on a lot of campaign literature too so as to try and hold onto marginals - "only coalitions from now on" etc), off the top of my head I think it went 316, then 325 then 329 early Friday morning for the Conservatives (revised exit polls). Paddy Ashdown, "if that's right and the Liberal Democrats end up with 10 seats I'll eat my hat." As it happened they ended up with 8 and he was presented with that marzipan hat cake on the morning news. 2017 was a shocker but I wasn't involved in that so didn't see the reactions at a count etc on the night, I had a feeling there might be a shock, the manifesto for the Conservatives was awful, it neither inspired Conservative voters or convinced Labour voters to switch, especially Hammond's economic segments.
@@whatthefrickbro It certainly was an eye opener. I remember them saying "oh it'll be a hung parliament etc. and Boris was like "Hold my Thesaurus". But yeah was not expecting the sheer amount of labour heartland seats going blue. Also the weather was terrible where I was. It was pissing down with rain LOL
Can you do BBC NEWS 24 CONCORDE'S FINAL FLIGHT With the full live hole coverage on Friday October 24th 2003 from 00:00pm to 23:58pm 23 hours and 58 minutes
That 1992 exit poll was a disaster. Meanwhile 2005 was absolutely bang on. In reality it was all over for John Major by around Christmas 1996 - although Sir John Gorst withdrew his resignation, it was still a big blow for Major. Major already had to pull off his "put up or shut up" chad move in June 1995 and the bounce from that didn't last too long.
@@Septimus_ii - Perhaps. All I remember though is staying up all night with a bunch of friends getting ready to party only to gradually discover as the night unfolded that the Tories would get in for another 5 years. I have recurring nightmares about it. The polls couldn't predict all the Tory expats from around the world whose votes were counted. That's why I am not prepared to totally write off the Tories this time because of their reputation for dirty tactics.
1987 too. I mean the inaccuracy was irrelevant so no one remembers it but they forecast the Tories winning about 40 seats less than they actually did. I think polling methodology has improved a lot since this dark age.
When you watch these back to back it's irritating how inconsistently the data is presented. Sometimes you get percentage of vote share, which doesn't tell you shit. Sometimes they give you specific numbers of seats, sometimes a range of probability, and sometimes just the difference between Conservatives and Labour. Sometimes they give you "Others," sometimes it's disaggregated. Makes it very hard to track the reliability of the poll from year to year.
Not really. The point of the exit poll is to give people an idea of what will happen that night. It's no different than any other poll, except it happens to be the last one taken before the actual votes coming in. Its job is not to predict the final seats or tallies. It's to give you an idea of what those final numbers could look like. And it's incredibly easy to tell the reliability of the polls. It was wrong in 1992 and 2015, as the poll predicted a hung parliament and the Conservatives won majorities. It was right in 1997, 2001, 2005, 2010, 2017 and 2019. In 1997 and 2001, it predicted huge Labour majorities, which happened. In 2005, it predicted a small Labour majority, which happened. In 2010 and 2017, it predicted a hung parliament, which happened. And in 2019, it predicted a big Conservative majority, which happened. It's been right 75% of the time in the last 8 elections, and of the 25% of the time it was wrong, 12.5% it wasn't off by that much - 14 seats. It's only been massively wrong once, the 1992 poll. So here's how you use it: Know that there's a high chance the 2024 exit poll will be close to the results, a very small chance it is completely wrong, and virtually a 0% chance that it hits the final numbers dead on.
@@jasonkoch3182 As I understand it, the Exit Poll always tries to go back to polling stations used before, which helps remove many of the biases which might otherwise arise. I imagine the first exit poll was always going to be the most difficult to be accurate therefore!
@@jasonkoch3182Completely wrong lol. Being the last poll of the election is not the only thing that distinguishes an exit poll. They actually ask people directly after coming out of voting booths, hence the name. The sample sizes are usually much larger as a result and theres more emphasis on predicting specific seats than on national vote share. Exit polls have a track record of being far closer to the actual results than polls taken during the election campaign. Thats why it's featured prominently in the coverage and a lot more attention is paid to it.
Done a little broadcast training in my time but no expert, my intuition: 1992 was a projector, lower res and harder to get the lighting right for, 1997 was a bunch of LCDs stacked together, which would be much easier to light and adjust the camera for as well as being higher pictre quality overall (minus the obvious bezels).
@@veggie42 I just thought more modern than 97 and to be honest I can't tell the difference between some of the highest resolutions, 720 looks alright to me and that's supposed to be low now.
1997 definitely has a certain "look" to it, not just here but in general. Fashions, how people looked and how they carried themselves, how things felt - it's unique.
@@PainsofBlaine232 In a democracy, parties deserve what the public give them. It's not about whether people question your actions or your position on the political spectrum, it's about who you can get to vote for you. That's how you deserve it.
The Tories are on track for their biggest defeat in the party's history. The polls all support that suggestion and I'm not seeing anything which suggests their fortunes are going to suddenly turn. They will probably fare worse than 1997 and end up on maybe 130 seats, facing the same period of rudderlessness that they had in the 2000s. I don't think it'll be as extreme as 1997 but Labour are still going to absolutely smash it. The SNP could be on track to lose 30+ seats as well, putting the Lib Dems in as the third party in the HoC. Reform will probably meet Nigel's objective of getting more votes than UKIP did in 2015, but I don't see that translating into seats because it didn't for UKIP either.
last few should have put the actual seat numbers won not just percentage- the exit poll clip shows seats - the slide shows percentages so hard to compare
I’m confused, in 2005 he said they got it totally wrong in 1992 as it said a Labour government. This video clearly shows they predicted the most likely outcome in 1992 from the exit poll was a Tory minority govt, so they didn’t get it completely wrong.
I think he misspoke. The 1992 poll showed a hung parliament with a decent chance Labour was the largest party, but the most likely outcome being that the Conservatives would fall 25 seats short of a majority. In the end, the conservatives won an outright majority. That poll was completely wrong.
I remember seeing a documentary where David Dimbleby was being interviewed and suggested that the 1992 exit poll originally suggested Labour had won a narrow majority but at the last minute it was changed to the one that ended up going out, predicting a hung parliament.
@@jasonkoch3182 In reality John Major's authority was already wobbling by June 1995 when he pulled his "put up or shut up" stunt to try and refresh his mandate. That worked for a while, but he was again badly undermined just before Christmas 1996 when Sir John Gorst resigned and Major lost his majority. Gorst changed his mind but the damage was done.
In comparison the polls a month before the election in 1992 had Labour leading by 1-3% and the result was a Tory win by 7.6%. A similar 8-10% shift this time around would still mean a Tory defeat by around 12-15%.
Yeah, the LD (Liberal Democrats) got obliterated after the 2010 GE. They sided with the Tory government with increasing student loans etc. and at the time students were their highest voting demographic, needless to say they migrated to Labour in the years to come.
they were on the rise up until 2010, in 2010 they made a coalition with conservatives and it’s made many of there supporters unhappy and they’ve suffered since
@@poopie4738 that they were. I think people thought that they would reign in the Conservatives but in the end were just the marionette to them. And as you said they have been paying the price since. Let's face it they will never get back in power and might as well be absorbed into the labour party.
@Jason Rose very true mate. But this will only lead to them not getting in power for at least the next election. In my opinion I cannot see labour getting in unless the Tories really mess up. With what is happening with the SNP there's a chance that the CONS and LAB may grab some additional seats.
Reverse 1992 at best for the Tories. The lowest model for labour (one that assumes no tactical voting) has them at 370 seats and even if you can shave off a few dozen more they can limp on.
Could anyone please explain how you need 326 seats for a majority (of 650), but in the same time, Labour having 418 seats has a majority of 179? 418-179=239?
Fascinating watch. Wasn't around for 1992 but can still remember shock that Tories won majority in 2015 from the exit poll. Also whoever is talking at 4:58 is wrong as exit poll in 92 predicted hung parliament rather than Labour as shown at start. 2001 also feels more modern than 2005 when you compare the two studios!
The rule of waiting until 10 is a bit funny. Say something were to happen in the polling station that caused a massive backup and people in line were still voting past 10. If the intent of the rule is to not influence voting at all, it certainly might still. One of those all or nothing things.
This is a really well put together video well done. Honestly I wasn’t even that focused on the exit polls but more looking at the graphs at the end just showing how ridiculously stupid first past the post is for an electoral system. I think the 2015 one shows it best, the SNP getting nearly twice the representation they deserve the Lib Dem’s, Greens and UKIP having nearly all their votes be meaningless due to geographical spread. Say what you want about the minor parties but FPP is just anti democratic.
@@reuben8140Coalitions can be strong governments too. Whatever you think of the 2010-15 coalition it was complete stable coming out of a financial crisis
@@joecurran2811 It was stable because Cameron and Clegg, whatever their *many* other faults, were at least capable of working together like sensible adults. A Corbyn-Sturgeon coalition, or especially a Johnson-Farage coalition, would likely have been a complete clusterf**k.
@@marksteelejrI have a feeling this election will be similar as in 2005. Not exactly a Labour landslide but a majority nonetheless. Would be a big sigh of relief for the Tories would get more than 200 seats. Anywhere below 150 would be a catastrophic defeat for them.
insight from a student studying politics! LAB are going to struggle to win elections with the ongoing independence struggle in scotland. Every route to a NEWLAB victory (1997-2005) included Scotland having a huge helping hand in their victory. Unless they can somewhat shift the political landscape in 3ish years, and change A LOT of blue seats red (while regaining red wall seats and having to hit the south HARD), CON will win election after election. Further the FPTP system will always favour three parties, CON, LAB & SNP (although SNP do win close to majorities in proportional systems (AMS) in Scotland). As we saw in 2017, the vote share was extremely close between CON and LAB, but the system makes it hard for the vote share to be equal to the number of seats. Unfortunately (or fortunately for some) LAB don't have an easy route to an election victory, unless it's hanging parliament & going into coalition with the SNP (if they don't get an indy ref 2). It's gonna be an interesting few years!
You are absolutely right here mate, I don't like Labour or the Conservatives but agree with your analysis. CON will need to work hard to regain the seats of the north and those of Scotland, although if I am honest I cannot see Labour winning the next election. They are focusing on the Metropolitan (Champagne Socialists) class too much and losing touch with their original voting base. I have always known Labour to be the party of the Working class, LD were the party of the students and Liberal Middle Class. IMO the CONS will win next government but most likely with a much smaller MAJ than 2019.
And we will have yet another Labour Landslide at 10 p.m. BST on July 4. Could Keir Starmer's Labour even top the 179-seat majority of Tony Blair in 1997?
Not surprising the BBC cocked up the exit poll in 1992 if they really did just "talk to lots of people coming out of the polling stations in marginals". For one thing it needs to be done via private ballot, not a conversation.
Nowadays I think they ask you to repeat your vote on a fake ballot paper. I normally vote in the evenings so the canvassers etc. have clocked off by then and I've never been asked. Although I voted at lunchtime in 2015 and pretty much had to fight my way out past canvassers.
I still think it's incredible how much the quality of the production improved between 2005 and 2010
You’re such a silly girl
I think you're making a mistake which is judging the quality of the recording that a particular person made. I've got 2005 in a much higher quality than the one on here, and indeed all the way back to 1992. It's just because the person recording it didn't tune in their TV/video properly, or used a poor quality DVD/video to record it.
it's due to the 2005 exit poll being recorded via VCR while the 2010 poll is likely screencasted from a livestream
if a BBC archive of the 2005 footage exists, then it would likely much clearer than this VHS recording shown here
Because HD arrived on the scene in 2008.
@@ajs41 um... no? its massively superior in ways other than the quality of the recording (widescreen, hd, aesthetics of the studio, quality of the graphics etc.), what a pointless pseudointellectual comment
Who's found themselves here waiting for the 2024 election?
Yws I'm here now
@@veggie42 Dave braIn-dead Nobhead No bloody wonder hIs Son Dead hIs LIttle Un-Cared Left Left In The Pub That why hIs 1-Leg Dad Dead havIn PIgafhIle ShaggIn Dave Round , hIs Mummy Stuffed If he hadnt Lyed about
her memory Trouble
BBC Exit poll 1992-2019 1945PM 1.6.24 it isn't me begging to be indulged - with a touch of nostalgia, cos nostalgia's crap. it's me knowing full well that election night was far more interesting back then circa 1980/95.... men in suits might be the thing but a bit of idealogical werewithall is what it was all about... a labour red wash during thid election might allow his nibs to take a chance on a few ideas and actually get soemthing done. as opposed to the stifling b.s of party lines being towed... we shall see.
@@JJONNYREPPThe interesting thing this year is how far Reform & the Greens will eat into the 2 major parties. Hopefully a lot!
@@aclark903 Comments on ‘BBC Exit poll 1992-2019’ 0959am 2.6.24 reform lost it's reason to be after allowing those it was pitted against join it's ranks... greens wont do much.... and the same old merry go round of b.s will take centre stage - again - so eager beaver journos will have something to chat about sunday morning... with or without andrew neil.
2005 a dissapointing night for hte lib dems on 53 seats........ 2019 a good night for the lib dems they're on 11 seats up from 8
2005 I was 1 year old, in 2019 I was 14 and this year I’m turning 17, next election (assuming they don’t call an early election) I’ll be 20 years old and be able to vote, it’s amazing how in just 4 election cycles (excluding the early ones) a whole generation grows up from little innocent babies in their mothers arms to being adults, able to drive, vote, drink, get married, have a house and kids etc... all in just 4 elections. 5 years did always seem a big gap to me, I think 3 years would be more appropriate but hey ho.
@@L8Pl Italy: o_____o
I think it's because they were expected to return around 100 mps
@@tobeytransport2802 You were 1 year old for the 2005 election, but you were 14 years old for the 2019 election? That doesn't add up. 🤔
@@tobeytransport2802 you can still vote in local elections prior to the 2024 one. In terms of an early election there is literally 0 chance of that happening. Early elections do not get called when the leading party has an 80 seat majority. The only possible way for it to happen is if the Conservative party splits into 2 different factions which would challenge the PM's leadership but that's even more unlikely. Those sort of things don't happen in modern British politics. Or the PM with an 80 seat majority somehow loses a vote of no confidence.
They absolutely *nailed* 2005. A 66 vote majority was projected for Labour, and a 66 vote majority is what they got. Props.
Got the tory one a bit wrong, they never got 209 seats.
Crazy how Blair won with such little vote percentage!
@@kb4903it's the pro-incumbency effect
@@kb4903 overall vote percentage doesn’t really matter in first past the post. It’s whoever gets the most votes. And because multiple parties stand candidates, winning 50% is nearly impossible.
There was a constituency in Northern Ireland in 2015 where the MP won with just 27% of the vote.
@@jasonkoch3182 yeah it’s been even lower than that before!
Just over a month until a new one!
Funny seeing you here!
No way I caught you in the exit poll compilation comments bahahaha
It's going to break all their methodologies with how shy the Tory vote will be. Will make the actual results much more interesting.
Kinnock/aunak major starner....
did NOT expect to see you here :0
Here we go again bro
Yes but don't say bro we aren't American teenagers
@@FormulaProg have you never been to Bradford bro
@@FormulaProg sorry bro
@@FormulaProgWe aren’t all from Hertfordshire either
Can’t believe all the hours of my life I’ve spent watching these videos and thinking about what ‘the next exit poll moment’ will be like - and they just come and go in a flash every few years.
excited for the next one in 40 Days time
@@chhitijpahari1011 Keir Starmer to be prime minister, landslide likely
@robmarshall9026 the local elections certainly suggested that Labour will likely be the largest party. But I wouldn't bet on a landslide.
@@quintuscrinis8032As long as the Tories are out 😂
@@a.demifemiflapo5795 likely but no guarantee. The local results last year looked eerily like those of 1992 and thus year resembled very closely those of 1993.
Main lesson from this is that Labour, Tory and SNP benefit the most out of FPTP. Gain plenty of seats without having a massive percentage lead in terms of vote.
@@TinyStixMusicChannel Yes. But they still benefit out of FPTP. Because in 2019, they got less than half of the (Scottish) votes, but most of the seats.
I’m not trying to criticise the SNP, by the way.
I’m just criticising FPTP.
I think Labour has actually lost out the last few elections because of FPTP. If the seats actually matched the votes I think Labour would have a much easier time forming a government than the Tories would. Sure Labour would likely never be able to govern alone again but I think they'd have been the largest party in a coalition much more often
@@reddragon3132 Yeah, FPTP screwed them over in 2017 especially.
@@YCFCfollower Labour had 262 seats in 2017 on about a 40% share of the vote. If anything, they were punished by FPTP in 2015 with the near-wipeout in Scotland meaning a net loss of seats despite recovering slightly (+1.4%) in their popular vote share from 2010.
@@CaradhrasAiguo49 Yeah, I meant they were screwed in 2017 because they only got a couple of % (votes) lower than Tories yet c.50 less seats.
Obviously you’re right about 2015 too!
That 2001 studio looked amazing
As a political nerd these moments are super exciting to watch even from many years ago
Who's here after Labour wiped out the Tories in 2024?
In these 12 minutes of exit poll my mum went from being 15 to being 42 and having a 15 year old son (me - I’m now 16)
It's crazy how these things go. Do you remember Miliband?
I went from 11 to 38 over the same period. I vaguely remember 1992, having had my first political epiphany two years earlier when my school teacher came into the classroom and announced that Mrs Thatcher had resigned as PM. She had been PM for my whole life, so it was a surprise to me that she could just go like that and it was the first time that I started really noticing that Government is formed by political parties winning elections, and PMs gain their office by leading those parties to victory. As a child, Margaret Thatcher had always seemed to me like another character on TV - a celebrity with a job running the country - and after her, John Major seemed like a dull person, fitting my stereotypical impression of a bank manager more than a Prime Minister. (My jaw hit the floor decades later when I realised that he had in fact been a banker at one time in his life.) The fact that he carried on as PM after 1992 left me nonplussed, but seeing Neil Kinnock replaced by John Smith was another moment of political education for me - apparently, because he didn't win, he had to resign and give someone else a chance.
By 1997, I was the same age you are now and wiser in the ways of the world. I can remember how Tony Blair's landslide shook the country: to so many it was an exhilarating event and the sense of sweeping change that would lead to a new future was almost tangible, though some of my Conservative-minded friends were disappointed and didn't like Blair's Cheshire-cat grin....
2001 and 2005 left me feeling nonplussed again; I didn't vote for Labour but it seemed inevitable that they would win those elections no matter how one voted. 2005 was more notable insofar as it saw things shifting away from Blair's favour: disillusionment over his approach to Afghanistan and Iraq, and his cosiness with President Bush, certainly took the bloom off the rose for many that had put their faith in him 8 years before.
2010 was a result that interested me and which I felt reasonably positive about. By that time I was clear in my mind that I am a moderate liberal at heart, so it pleased me to see Liberal Democrats having a shot at being in government, albeit as minor partners in a Conservative-led agenda. I was disappointed by both parties in the end and switched my vote in 2015, so you can imagine my disappointment in that year's result, especially as the exit poll turned out to have underestimated the Conservatives' numbers.
2017 struck me as a relief in some respects and a disappointment in others. Likewise 2019.
I wonder what 2024's exit poll will look like, assuming an election doesn't happen before then? By that time, a new generation will be entitled to have its say - so who can tell what will result?
@@henryficklin3333 I can’t speak for the other guy, but as another 16 year old I can say that most people my age only took notice of politics around the 2015 election
@@benlewis1087 It was the brexit referendum for me in 2016, nobody I knew had parents who wanted to leave and I though that represented most of the population, it came as a shock to me when we left
@thedevilscorner5868 yeah you should be
Thank you for making this compilation, such a good watch!
It's mad how successful new labour was with those landslides
And now that they've spent the 2010's making themselves unelectable, I'm afraid that labour landslides are a thing of the past. Dammit Miliband, you fucked it up
At this stage I don’t think Labour will have an actual majority government until 2029 at the earliest.
theyev been winning the same percentages they won 10 years ago FPTP fucks em
@@joshguest1104 theyve been winning the same percentages they won 10 years ago FPTP fucks em
@@caelan8819 they've caused 2 hung parliaments since losing a majority so they're not that far off.
*B O N G*
Can we appreciate how accurate 2005 was ?
No
No
@@dba1222 ratio
@@charlesottowilliamwade5328 ratio
@@ccf3294 🤣
Had to say it but think David Dimbleby meant 1832**
duke of wellington rising out of his grave there
Can't wait for this year exit poll
This type of exit poll cannot be done in the US or Canada, as both countries stretch across SEVERAL timezones.
3 days until the next one!
Very accurate throughout, and some of those were wildly different to the pre-election opinion polls such as in 1992 and 2015
I hope you update this for 2024!
You need to update this video now
well well well
Getting ready for this year's election with a trip down memory lane!
Hello Election 2024 🎉
The real lesson here is that first past the post needs to be removed by proportional representation.
Well the referendum in 2011 put paid to that.
@@user-po2qb6cm9q then maybe have a bit of honesty to voters..
Rank choice voting is another option.
@@user-po2qb6cm9qNo it didn’t.
I voted for AV pkus
Just watching this series catch up before the next election.
Miss David Dimbleby, elections were just better with him.
Hey!!! Was your channel deleted or are you a fan channel?
An Updated version will be needed in few weeks for this year's General Election.
I remember the John Major victory very well. When the actual results started coming in and it was obvious the exit poll was wrong and that the Tories were going to get a majority it took the BBC several hours before they admitted their precious poll was wrong!
2015 was an unbelievable night, all the discussion in the weeks and months running up was "we may never see a majority for one Party ever again" (The Lib Dems had it on a lot of campaign literature too so as to try and hold onto marginals - "only coalitions from now on" etc), off the top of my head I think it went 316, then 325 then 329 early Friday morning for the Conservatives (revised exit polls). Paddy Ashdown, "if that's right and the Liberal Democrats end up with 10 seats I'll eat my hat." As it happened they ended up with 8 and he was presented with that marzipan hat cake on the morning news.
2017 was a shocker but I wasn't involved in that so didn't see the reactions at a count etc on the night, I had a feeling there might be a shock, the manifesto for the Conservatives was awful, it neither inspired Conservative voters or convinced Labour voters to switch, especially Hammond's economic segments.
@@mred20 that cold winter night in December 2019 will always be the best uk election night
@@whatthefrickbro In what sense lol? I enjoyed the result but it wasn't a surprise or anything of such, pretty straightforward.
@@whatthefrickbro It certainly was an eye opener. I remember them saying "oh it'll be a hung parliament etc. and Boris was like "Hold my Thesaurus". But yeah was not expecting the sheer amount of labour heartland seats going blue. Also the weather was terrible where I was. It was pissing down with rain LOL
@@whatthefrickbro nah, one of the worst. But hopefully we'll see a massive change swinging the other way for the next election.
UKIP: 2 (Actual 1)
Despite getting 12% of the vote. Tories won the government on 36% of the vote.
Can you do BBC NEWS 24 CONCORDE'S FINAL FLIGHT With the full live hole coverage on Friday October 24th 2003 from 00:00pm to 23:58pm 23 hours and 58 minutes
That 1992 exit poll was a disaster. Meanwhile 2005 was absolutely bang on.
In reality it was all over for John Major by around Christmas 1996 - although Sir John Gorst withdrew his resignation, it was still a big blow for Major. Major already had to pull off his "put up or shut up" chad move in June 1995 and the bounce from that didn't last too long.
The Exit Poll is always pretty accurate apart from 1992. I remember it well.
1992 gets a bad wrap, but even it wasn't that far wrong and was much closer than the opinion polls had been
@@Septimus_ii - Perhaps. All I remember though is staying up all night with a bunch of friends getting ready to party only to gradually discover as the night unfolded that the Tories would get in for another 5 years. I have recurring nightmares about it. The polls couldn't predict all the Tory expats from around the world whose votes were counted. That's why I am not prepared to totally write off the Tories this time because of their reputation for dirty tactics.
@@drdavid1963Is that allowed now?
@@joecurran2811 🤣🤣🤣🤣
1987 too. I mean the inaccuracy was irrelevant so no one remembers it but they forecast the Tories winning about 40 seats less than they actually did. I think polling methodology has improved a lot since this dark age.
When you watch these back to back it's irritating how inconsistently the data is presented. Sometimes you get percentage of vote share, which doesn't tell you shit. Sometimes they give you specific numbers of seats, sometimes a range of probability, and sometimes just the difference between Conservatives and Labour. Sometimes they give you "Others," sometimes it's disaggregated. Makes it very hard to track the reliability of the poll from year to year.
Not really. The point of the exit poll is to give people an idea of what will happen that night. It's no different than any other poll, except it happens to be the last one taken before the actual votes coming in. Its job is not to predict the final seats or tallies. It's to give you an idea of what those final numbers could look like. And it's incredibly easy to tell the reliability of the polls. It was wrong in 1992 and 2015, as the poll predicted a hung parliament and the Conservatives won majorities. It was right in 1997, 2001, 2005, 2010, 2017 and 2019. In 1997 and 2001, it predicted huge Labour majorities, which happened. In 2005, it predicted a small Labour majority, which happened. In 2010 and 2017, it predicted a hung parliament, which happened. And in 2019, it predicted a big Conservative majority, which happened. It's been right 75% of the time in the last 8 elections, and of the 25% of the time it was wrong, 12.5% it wasn't off by that much - 14 seats. It's only been massively wrong once, the 1992 poll.
So here's how you use it: Know that there's a high chance the 2024 exit poll will be close to the results, a very small chance it is completely wrong, and virtually a 0% chance that it hits the final numbers dead on.
@@jasonkoch3182 As I understand it, the Exit Poll always tries to go back to polling stations used before, which helps remove many of the biases which might otherwise arise. I imagine the first exit poll was always going to be the most difficult to be accurate therefore!
@@jasonkoch3182Completely wrong lol. Being the last poll of the election is not the only thing that distinguishes an exit poll. They actually ask people directly after coming out of voting booths, hence the name. The sample sizes are usually much larger as a result and theres more emphasis on predicting specific seats than on national vote share. Exit polls have a track record of being far closer to the actual results than polls taken during the election campaign. Thats why it's featured prominently in the coverage and a lot more attention is paid to it.
So why does 1992 have a modern looking screen and 1997 is a load of TVs stacked up....
Done a little broadcast training in my time but no expert, my intuition: 1992 was a projector, lower res and harder to get the lighting right for, 1997 was a bunch of LCDs stacked together, which would be much easier to light and adjust the camera for as well as being higher pictre quality overall (minus the obvious bezels).
By 2010 look how modern
@@veggie42 I just thought more modern than 97 and to be honest I can't tell the difference between some of the highest resolutions, 720 looks alright to me and that's supposed to be low now.
1997 definitely has a certain "look" to it, not just here but in general. Fashions, how people looked and how they carried themselves, how things felt - it's unique.
Its impressive how much more accurate they got, only off by a few seats in the latest exit polls
2024 EXIT POLL PREDICTIONS!
“And what we’re saying is…”
Labour largest party but short of a majority
Labour majority - landslide likely.
Labour majority of 8, hung parliament election in 5 years time
@@VOTE4CHANGE I think that's possible too. I reckon small Labour Majority or minority. But we will see
Based on the local election results,
Hung parliament - Labour short by 20/30 seats.
4 July 2024 exit poll prediction Labour 1997 style landslide
Although they certainly wouldn’t deserve it
It won't be a landslide, labour will win though😊
@@PainsofBlaine232At least the Tories will be out
@@PainsofBlaine232 In a democracy, parties deserve what the public give them. It's not about whether people question your actions or your position on the political spectrum, it's about who you can get to vote for you. That's how you deserve it.
The Tories are on track for their biggest defeat in the party's history. The polls all support that suggestion and I'm not seeing anything which suggests their fortunes are going to suddenly turn. They will probably fare worse than 1997 and end up on maybe 130 seats, facing the same period of rudderlessness that they had in the 2000s.
I don't think it'll be as extreme as 1997 but Labour are still going to absolutely smash it. The SNP could be on track to lose 30+ seats as well, putting the Lib Dems in as the third party in the HoC.
Reform will probably meet Nigel's objective of getting more votes than UKIP did in 2015, but I don't see that translating into seats because it didn't for UKIP either.
the graphic design genuinely peaked in 2001 and all downhill from there
Skip to 6:29 when the video freezes
@@DeNTaN2002 *pfp
@@DeNTaN2002 pp I can’t
Why do I watch this alot
Literally all the time it is recommended
@@mahfuzurchowdhury2765 good point
Graphs are cool, they got pretty colours
@@irthamepali goodpoint
Would be more exciting if there was no exit poll
Agree, or if the exit poll was completely wrong
It will be interesting to see what the exit polls will be at 10pm London Time on July 4, 2024.
It will be a majority for Labour of around 130-150
@@Sean-ld1ek More like 200+, I think
You might want to update this in 6 days
Do you mean 1832?
2017 was very close to being dead accurate. Hopefully they bring that methodology back for 2024.
last few should have put the actual seat numbers won not
just percentage- the exit poll clip shows seats - the slide shows percentages so hard to compare
Who will be presenting in July? Laura Kuenssberg?
I’m confused, in 2005 he said they got it totally wrong in 1992 as it said a Labour government. This video clearly shows they predicted the most likely outcome in 1992 from the exit poll was a Tory minority govt, so they didn’t get it completely wrong.
I think he misspoke. The 1992 poll showed a hung parliament with a decent chance Labour was the largest party, but the most likely outcome being that the Conservatives would fall 25 seats short of a majority. In the end, the conservatives won an outright majority. That poll was completely wrong.
I remember seeing a documentary where David Dimbleby was being interviewed and suggested that the 1992 exit poll originally suggested Labour had won a narrow majority but at the last minute it was changed to the one that ended up going out, predicting a hung parliament.
@@jasonkoch3182 In reality John Major's authority was already wobbling by June 1995 when he pulled his "put up or shut up" stunt to try and refresh his mandate. That worked for a while, but he was again badly undermined just before Christmas 1996 when Sir John Gorst resigned and Major lost his majority. Gorst changed his mind but the damage was done.
2:21 Hopefully the lose for the Tory party will be even greater than this moment when the election results come in on July 4th.
Its amazing how Number 10 Downing street and Larry the cat remain but the PM comes and goes
At what point in 1992 did the exit poll say Labour government?
4:08 is that the guy from 20th Century Battlefields? Lol very similar voice
Yes, Peter Snow i think
2010 was my first time watching. I miss Dimbleby.
Looking forward to the election
2024: it is 10 o'clock and we can declare that Brian Butterfield is to be prime minister with a landslide likely
Count Binface faces off against Lord Buckethead.
Have you been following the Butterfield diet plan?
Bonbonbonbons
Bye bye Tories
i wonder, who’s the bbc presenter from the 90s to 2017 reporting the results? did he retire in 2019?
Yeah his name is David Dimbleby
The 'Shy Tory' factor needs to be even bigger than ever for the Tories to get another 1992-esque miracle this time round.
The issue is the new right wants the Tories dead and buried.
Labour were never predicted to receive a landslide with a poll lead of twenty points in 1992 unlike now. The situation is not comparable.
@@noahbrock349 Agree. It's what I was saying really, that I can't see the polls being that wrong to save them.
In comparison the polls a month before the election in 1992 had Labour leading by 1-3% and the result was a Tory win by 7.6%. A similar 8-10% shift this time around would still mean a Tory defeat by around 12-15%.
How come they got it so wrong in 1992
This year's exit poll will be a record 😂
I don't know much about British politics but I know that whoever the hell is LD have sinked low
Yeah, the LD (Liberal Democrats) got obliterated after the 2010 GE. They sided with the Tory government with increasing student loans etc. and at the time students were their highest voting demographic, needless to say they migrated to Labour in the years to come.
they were on the rise up until 2010, in 2010 they made a coalition with conservatives and it’s made many of there supporters unhappy and they’ve suffered since
@@poopie4738 that they were. I think people thought that they would reign in the Conservatives but in the end were just the marionette to them. And as you said they have been paying the price since.
Let's face it they will never get back in power and might as well be absorbed into the labour party.
@Jason Rose very true mate. But this will only lead to them not getting in power for at least the next election.
In my opinion I cannot see labour getting in unless the Tories really mess up. With what is happening with the SNP there's a chance that the CONS and LAB may grab some additional seats.
@@awestruckbeaver3344They had a taste of being near power and Nick Clegg's head got too big. Then he releases a video saying he's sorry 😂😂
2:38 1932??? I think he means 1832
I remember " were all right " were all righr" everyone thought labour had won so stayed at home and gave Major a tory majority. Classic
Dope
I wonder if be 1992 again or 1997
Well judging by how Sunak has handled the election so far........
As long as its not 2019
Reverse 1992 at best for the Tories. The lowest model for labour (one that assumes no tactical voting) has them at 370 seats and even if you can shave off a few dozen more they can limp on.
Major starmer ^ blair
@@catmonarchist8920yes correct
Could anyone please explain how you need 326 seats for a majority (of 650), but in the same time, Labour having 418 seats has a majority of 179? 418-179=239?
Largest party (Labour) minus the rest (Conservatives LibDems etc)= majority
Hope it helps
@@germanvalle6766 ahhh ok, that makes sense! Thanks a lot!
I was confused as well but just simply take away the number you need for a majority from the total seats and multiply by 2
@@x_zschannel it works too
411-326=85
85×2= 170
Fascinating watch. Wasn't around for 1992 but can still remember shock that Tories won majority in 2015 from the exit poll. Also whoever is talking at 4:58 is wrong as exit poll in 92 predicted hung parliament rather than Labour as shown at start. 2001 also feels more modern than 2005 when you compare the two studios!
it keeps stopping
the 2019 one always amuses me particularly after social media had been screaming that Corbyn was a shoe in to be PM.
4:25 Not quite correct. The 1992 exit poll stated a hung parliament with Conservative as largest party - see 0:05
that would have likely implied a labour government. lib dems in 1992 would have worked with kinnock
@@M-bi2yjProbably but the exit poll doesn't look at that.
@@Scottish_TV_Gold sure. but it’s perfectly reasonable to say that the exit poll implied a labour government.
@@M-bi2yj It forecast the Conservatives as the largest party which was correct.
Yes starner is a major ed davey is more kinnock
What the hell happened in 1992? lol.
The rule of waiting until 10 is a bit funny. Say something were to happen in the polling station that caused a massive backup and people in line were still voting past 10. If the intent of the rule is to not influence voting at all, it certainly might still.
One of those all or nothing things.
The polling stations close at 10
@ses694 Not exactly. As long as you are in a queue before 10pm, you are allowed to vote, even if the queue delays you past 10.
waiting for the 2024 election
1932, David? Didn't you mean 1832? 🤣🤔 wrong by ghastly proportions
Labour 🌹🤗
5:03 No, it didn't.
This is a really well put together video well done.
Honestly I wasn’t even that focused on the exit polls but more looking at the graphs at the end just showing how ridiculously stupid first past the post is for an electoral system.
I think the 2015 one shows it best, the SNP getting nearly twice the representation they deserve the Lib Dem’s, Greens and UKIP having nearly all their votes be meaningless due to geographical spread. Say what you want about the minor parties but FPP is just anti democratic.
Completely agree
Im really torn on this, I like strong governments but UKIP polling ~25% at some points with no seats projected is mental
FPTP is an excellent system from a guy living in Ireland. It has several advantages other systems don’t enjoy.
@@reuben8140Coalitions can be strong governments too. Whatever you think of the 2010-15 coalition it was complete stable coming out of a financial crisis
@@joecurran2811 It was stable because Cameron and Clegg, whatever their *many* other faults, were at least capable of working together like sensible adults. A Corbyn-Sturgeon coalition, or especially a Johnson-Farage coalition, would likely have been a complete clusterf**k.
Per che io super hero
As 38 seat majority and they conceded to Labour on every policy
Prediction 2024
Labour - 40% (372)
Conservatives - 24% (207)
Reform UK - 10% (0)
Lib Dems - 8% (30)
Green - 4% (1)
SNP - 2% (12)
According to electoral calcus UK Lab 479 seats Con 92, LD 48, snp 12, Lab majority 308
@@marksteelejrI have a feeling this election will be similar as in 2005. Not exactly a Labour landslide but a majority nonetheless. Would be a big sigh of relief for the Tories would get more than 200 seats. Anywhere below 150 would be a catastrophic defeat for them.
@@DFandV at 92 it would be worse that John major in 1997 and the Duke of wellington after the great reform act of 1832
No way the Tories are getting more than 200 seats
I think the Greens have a good chance of getting two
Amazing to think labour have airbrushed blair
2024 Labour Majority of 100~110
Pig Gate look it up
Given the 2024 election, I'd love to know the actual exit poll. One would imagine a comfortable Labour win, and a major Conservative drop off.
Remember when Labour use to win elections, good times.
That was when they were led by Tony Blair, and were a capitalist party
The only time they won was when they braced capitalism and ditched socialism. Basically when they had common sense.
@@adamcarter5254 They didn’t have common sense then either. Conservatives and Labour have been terrible for years.
@@SkySouthern273 Sad truth.
@@SkySouthern273 I didn't say they had common sense. But I was saying favouring capitalism over socialism is common sense
insight from a student studying politics!
LAB are going to struggle to win elections with the ongoing independence struggle in scotland. Every route to a NEWLAB victory (1997-2005) included Scotland having a huge helping hand in their victory. Unless they can somewhat shift the political landscape in 3ish years, and change A LOT of blue seats red (while regaining red wall seats and having to hit the south HARD), CON will win election after election.
Further the FPTP system will always favour three parties, CON, LAB & SNP (although SNP do win close to majorities in proportional systems (AMS) in Scotland). As we saw in 2017, the vote share was extremely close between CON and LAB, but the system makes it hard for the vote share to be equal to the number of seats.
Unfortunately (or fortunately for some) LAB don't have an easy route to an election victory, unless it's hanging parliament & going into coalition with the SNP (if they don't get an indy ref 2).
It's gonna be an interesting few years!
>student
Opinion dismissed
@@tpower1912 why's that Thom?
Well said
You are absolutely right here mate, I don't like Labour or the Conservatives but agree with your analysis. CON will need to work hard to regain the seats of the north and those of Scotland, although if I am honest I cannot see Labour winning the next election.
They are focusing on the Metropolitan (Champagne Socialists) class too much and losing touch with their original voting base. I have always known Labour to be the party of the Working class, LD were the party of the students and Liberal Middle Class.
IMO the CONS will win next government but most likely with a much smaller MAJ than 2019.
Very accurate analysis mate.
14 years of Tory bs hopefully coming to an end soon.
the bs will be literally the exact same if not worse under labour
@@AFGuidesHD how have you come to that conclusion?
@@BlyatimirPootin by being alive for more than 12 years.
@@AFGuidesHD ok tory fan girl
@@BlyatimirPootin not a tory fan at all lol
Lord Haw Haw
And we will have yet another Labour Landslide at 10 p.m. BST on July 4. Could Keir Starmer's Labour even top the 179-seat majority of Tony Blair in 1997?
Not surprising the BBC cocked up the exit poll in 1992 if they really did just "talk to lots of people coming out of the polling stations in marginals". For one thing it needs to be done via private ballot, not a conversation.
Nowadays I think they ask you to repeat your vote on a fake ballot paper. I normally vote in the evenings so the canvassers etc. have clocked off by then and I've never been asked.
Although I voted at lunchtime in 2015 and pretty much had to fight my way out past canvassers.
5:48 the moment it clicked for me how f*cked up first past the post is
8:30 for the SNP/LibDem is also a good example
Well it is even more so now. Labour winning 64% of seats with 34% of the vote
Has got so accurate in more recent times, usually just a handful of seats off.
Social network anche frgile per che te ispostato anche Teresa me risponde
This election is going to consign the conservative party to the grubby footnotes of history
14 years drawing to a close. I can actually remember what I was doing in 2010 on election day and the day after.
How tf did the Lib Dems fall off so hard 😂😂😂
Coalition
Basically they promised to get rid of tuition fees, but then went into coalition with the Tories in 2010 and ended up tripling tuition fees instead
Aghh! Hugh Edwards.