Bob Piper has been a Labour Councillor for the Abbey
Ward in Sandwell, West Midlands, for nine years. He is a lifelong supporter of Aston Villa Football Club and a follower of Yorkshire County Cricket Club.
The views expressed here are mine in a personal capacity, not those of the Labour Party, Sandwell MBC, Aston Villa or Yorkshire County Cricket Club. Get it! Mine... just mine!
Unlike the anoraks over at Political Betting I don't spend countless hours trainspotting over opinion polls, so I can't claim to be an expert on polling methodology. But just a casual glance at the summary of this poll in the Independent on Sunday you really do have to wonder about the validity of the word Independent.
I give no credence at all to an opinion poll which tells people their answer as part of the question. I was, and remain, an opponent of the war in Iraq, but to see this portrayed as if it were a valid question of people's opinion.... "Britain should never have become involved in Iraq"... and, what do we find, shock horror, two-thirds of respondents agreed with the answer they were given by the person who asked the question doesn't impress me. Then we get the entirely neutral statements... "The Labour Party will lose the next election regardless of who leads it" and "a Conservative government would be more effective against knife crime than the present administration".
And blow me down with a feather, the majority of people agreed with all of those leading statements.
We are told by the ludicrously named Independent... "ComRes has been carrying out opinion polls for the IoS since 2004. It is a member of the British Polling Council."
It's not often I concur with Iain Dale, but when he writes...
The Independent is no longer a serious newspaper. It's not even a "Viewspaper". It's a comic.
... then it's difficult to argue. A 100% of people I surveyed this evening agreed with the statement "The Independent is a crock of shit and the methodology of their polling company is a meaningless pile of old crap too".
Comres appears to be a pukka polling company with its own website etc-I checked-, but I agree with you Bob, those are absurd questions which should not be used by any professional body seeking to measure opinion on anything. It certainly doesn't reflect well on the Independent, a paper I've always supported more than read as I've thought it's struggling as bit as the smallest quality paper in the market.
"... then it's difficult to argue. A 100% of people I surveyed this evening agreed with the statement "The Independent is a crock of shit and the methodology of their polling company is a meaningless pile of old crap too"."
then it's difficult to argue. A 100% of people I surveyed this evening agreed with the statement "The Labour Party is a crock of shit and my methodology of polling is a meaningless pile of old crap too,
The overall result is in line with polls over the last few months if slightly better for the Conservatives . What it doesnot show is the collpase of Labour suprt in marginal seats which turned Brown away from an early election in the first place.
Martin Bright writes in the New Statesman that most Labour MP`s have given up and are now wondering if there will enough senior people left for a shadow cabinet.Brave loyal Greyfriars Bobby , will , I am sure ,sniff at the grave for some time to come. Hopi has turned to the future , Purnell he thinks .
How about you Bob. Is Purnell your cup of horlicks ? It would be simpler just to join the Conservative Party wouldn`t it.
As so often, newmania, you couldn't hit a cow's arse with a banjo. The point of what I posted wasn't about the outcome of the poll, but the incredibly biased nature of the methodology. I did try to give you a pointer on that by emphasising I'm opposed to the war in Iraq, but I don't accept the outcome of this sort of biased opinion poll.
So, sorry to disappoint you, but I wasn't being loyal, Greyfriars or otherwise. I've tried to help you with this before, and it is difficult without seeming patronising, but.... if you could just take the trouble to read the posting before you comment on it, you would avoid making such a nob of yourself.
Purnell is another repulsive New Labour luvvie. Attlee would turn in his grave if he could see these scum. Even Harold Wilson would be disgusted by them. And I speak as someone who has never been Labour, but recognise that a once great party is being brought to its knees by lowlife like Purnell, Hutton, Heart Of Flint, etc.
Yes I understood your post and agree .You also drew my attention to the Poll which I have just watched James Purnell discuss on Andrew Marr as well as what appears a copy of Conservative proposals to dismantle incapacity benefit.
They say Purnell is the boy , to me if you are going to have Conservative Policies I could do without the New Labour Smarm.
Bob Piper said:
July 20, 2008 11:59 AM | permalink
Presumably you won't be supporting Blair-lite David Cameron then.
Fred Griffin said:
July 20, 2008 2:32 PM | permalink
As in so much else, "Yes Prime Minister" exposed this farce years ago....
Sir Humphrey: "You know what happens: nice young lady comes up to you. Obviously you want to create a good impression, you don't want to look a fool, do you? So she starts asking you some questions: Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the number of young people without jobs?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Are you worried about the rise in crime among teenagers?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think there is a lack of discipline in our Comprehensive schools?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think young people welcome some authority and leadership in their lives?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think they respond to a challenge?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Would you be in favour of reintroducing National Service?"
Bernard Woolley: "Oh...well, I suppose I might be."
Sir Humphrey: "Yes or no?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Of course you would, Bernard. After all you told you can't say no to that. So they don't mention the first five questions and they publish the last one."
Bernard Woolley: "Is that really what they do?"
Sir Humphrey: "Well, not the reputable ones no, but there aren't many of those. So alternatively the young lady can get the opposite result."
Bernard Woolley: "How?"
Sir Humphrey: "Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the danger of war?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Are you worried about the growth of armaments?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think there is a danger in giving young people guns and teaching them how to kill?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think it is wrong to force people to take up arms against their will?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Would you oppose the reintroduction of National Service?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
It’s a shame about the Indy's current angry sixth-former style editorial line because the paper still employs some fine writers. Goodness knows which party it might support come a general election now that Gleggie's gone all Thatcherite but, as its influence is vanishingly close to zero, who cares? It did however print my letter (the idea for part of which I stole from without acknowledgement one of your posts - sorry) on Monday about the folly of its support for the dangerously daft David Davis...
And a fine letter it was too, Brian, and I agree about the Indy having some fine writers, although how long the likes of Robert Fisk are to hang around as this bunch become increasingly rabid, who knows?
Interestingly, their website barely mentions the poll, so perhaps they are embarrassed too.
Blairlite ? What does that make the Party that copies everything he does , diluted water ~?
Who are you backing to replace Brown Bob ? Balls ? Johnson ?...some lefty I don`t know ?
I think that Luke Akenhurst would make a fine leader myself.
Spill the beans don`t say you have not thought about it
No, seriously, I haven't given it a thought. I suspect none of the candidates would come from my wing of the party, but Johnson at least has a trade union background, and he's been a good Secretary of State after the dreadful Patricia Hewitt.
Dominic Lawson is glib, shallow, and a very cheap controversialist who wrongly imagines himself to be funny and challenging, when in fact he's just an idiot.
No, I'm thinking specifically of Dominic, whose columns I've been reading for years (with mounting rage). Though the same does go for Nigel. They are father and son, and Nigella Lawson is part of that family too.
July 19, 2008 8:35 PM | permalink
Comres appears to be a pukka polling company with its own website etc-I checked-, but I agree with you Bob, those are absurd questions which should not be used by any professional body seeking to measure opinion on anything. It certainly doesn't reflect well on the Independent, a paper I've always supported more than read as I've thought it's struggling as bit as the smallest quality paper in the market.