LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksFF 31 (down 6)
FG 28 (Up 4)
LAB 15 (Down 1)
SF 9 (NO CHANGE)
GREENS 5 (UP 1)
PD 3 (NO CHANGE)
OTHERS 9 (UP 1)
FF 31 (down 6)
FG 28 (Up 4)
LAB 15 (Down 1)
SF 9 (NO CHANGE)
GREENS 5 (UP 1)
PD 3 (NO CHANGE)
OTHERS 9 (UP 1)
That's interesting. TNS/MRBI are always the most well respected, if they say there's a 15% gap between FF/PD and FG/Lab/Grn then that means something.
Nice to see us Greens heading in the right direction!
Unfortunately the other thread (on the same poll!Originally Posted by AndrewM
) shows no change.
Does anyone have a link to the correct figures?
Failed liberal traitors:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I accept polls can show general trends but in a PR STV system and the inherrent problems of telephone market research I don't lose much sleep over 'em
"I thought that I had a duty to help those that weren't as lucky as me." -- John Hume
Who said it was a phone poll?
I've said it before and I'll say it again. Polls aren't interesting because could predict an election, they're interesting because of the impact that have in the present. Cause backbench troubles, influences policy, leadership troubles, early elections etc. THAT'S why they're interesting.
I prefer the Red C polls because they have shown themselves more accurate.
Also a poll is only a snapshot in time.
Also if you add FF and SF you get 40%. Add the PD's and you get 43% which is level with FG-Labour. Still 5 points behind FG-Lab-Greens but then pro-FF Independents could just get FF-PD-SF over the line. Of course SF is supposedly unacceptable to the PDs but a year is a long time in politics...
Also this poll comes after the FG conference and FG could be expected to get a boost from that, along with the Prime Time Investigates report on SOME hospitals. When people are actually choosing a new govt the picture will be very different.
Leadership ratings were in the 9 O'Clock news. All down except Sargent who was up 3%
Reply With Quote