egafd.com

I thought you took no notice of polls?

Will be interesting to see what happens in the Norwich North by-election this week.

I've always seen mid-term polls as a good reading of what the public really think of a Government, much more so than I do an election. The election is often people just voting against the opposition. I mean, look at Margaret Thatcher, she was the most universally loathed PM ever. Her mid-term ratings were about as low as could be yet she carried on winning elections and became the most sucessful PM (in terms of numbers of years in the job) for more than a century. I think we need to look at another way of doing things because people don't get who they want (apart from occasionally) at an election. Then there is the other matter of politicans hating the public having a right to have their say - only one of the last three PM's was even elected and if the other could have avoided it (Blair) he would have done too.

Who are YouGov if they've commisioned the poll ? Its funny that questions such as 'Do you think we're trying to fight the war on the cheap?' were asked within days of the headlines being full of similar conjecture.

It would appear to be a poll, the 'results' or outcome of which have been skewed by a single issue.

Poll-questions are designed precisely to elicit the required response.
Therefore, they're a waste of time except to the initiating party.

Good for propaganda-purposes in the sense of bolstering well-meaning
but very very stupid people like Hazel Blears in their unshakeable
conviction that their party never makes mistakes, but fatal in reinforcing
the 'disconnect' between the governing and the governed.
Focus-groups and skewed polls are exactly why Blur and Brown got into
so much trouble. They have NO idea what the electorate really thinks.
Then again, they don't much care....