Now that numbers are coming in, and we will have definitive numbers soon! is it time to take a look at the media practice of publishing polls coming up to elections? There is no doubt that polls have an influence on voter thinking. As such, should they be better controlled? Should there be a moratorium on them up to two weeks before an election ( as in France). Indeed, should polling organisations require some form of licensing to show they are genuinely independent?
No polls should not be regulated. And while they can influence voters I think that this influence best enables them to use their vote strategically as opposed to wasting it.
"If we can but prevent the government from wasting the labours of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy." - Thomas Jefferson
I think they should, and I like the licenses idea too. The Quantum Research polls are garbage (500 sample size and god knows what methodology) and most people haven't the statistical knowledge to work out why they're garbage. I've very little doubt that they're produced to drive an agenda.
I also think polls harm the debate. People and candidates, more importantly, stop talking about the issues and start analysing polls. Enabling people to vote strategically (Tea Party) is as much a bad thing as a good thing. People should vote for what/who they believe in, that would give a better picture of what the electorate wants.
If that was the case you may well have President Gallagher, don't tell me all those FG votes went to Michael D because they love his policies. If there hadn't been polls Gallagher would/could have won because the others would have been unaware he was in front.Originally Posted by mickmick
McGuinness certainly wouldn't have been "wasting" time digging up dirt.
"If we can but prevent the government from wasting the labours of the people, under the pretence of taking care of them, they must become happy." - Thomas Jefferson
Yes I'd say have three week moratorium and polling companies that make the pretence of being scientific should be legally required to show the raw data and the maths employed upon it. They should also be legally required to include the proportion of respondents intending to abstain or spoil the ballot.
"We are part and parcel of the political fabric of this State" - Ms McDonald. Sinn Féin.
There should be a requirement for the data to be published and for the companies to be properly identified.
Regards...jmcc
Rather than trying to outlaw/regulate polls (impossible what with the Internet and all) I would rather we educated people to be able to understand/critique them correctly.
I know iit won't ever happen though.
If for elections involving just one job, i.e. the President, there was only one person, one vote and none of this PR/transfers b0110x, there would be no need to vote "strategically". Why in Gods name can it not be "Who do you want for President - X marks the spot". Instead we get this stupid, and probably very undemocratic rubbish of transfers when there is only one job. It should not be "I want X, but if not him Y, and if not him, then A and if not her then B and...."
Toss. Thats all it is. Needless toss.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
IMO, a reduction in strategic voting is exactly why a moratorium on polls would be a good idea. I would push it out a lot longer that two weeks, in fact. People should vote for their preferred candidate.
There is absolutely no reason why any vote should be 'wasted' in a PR/STV system. (Or any system, for that matter - the only vote wasted is a vote not cast). I find it astonishing that so people can't seem to grasp this. It shows mixture of complete ignorance of the STV system and a pathetic desire to be on the winning side.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote