28 April 2008

YouGov's Inaccurate Polling Could Be Self-Fulfilling.

While every other polling organisation has shown the Mayor contest neck and neck with either Johnson or Livingstone leading by 1 or 2%, internet pollsters YouGov have consistently shown a Tory/Johnson bias - giving the Tory Evening Standard - headline Johnson leads of between the 6% and 16% (latest 11%).

While YouGov have admitted some erros in their sampling (fewer ethnic minorities and young people) they maintain they are right and the rest of the polling industry is wrong.

The problem for Livingstone is that YouGov and the Evening Standard giving Johnson such huge leads could deter turnout and in particular Livingstone supporters and voters.

I believe this campaign is neck and neck and if we are not careful YouGov's inaccuracy consistingly giving...
much bigger lead to the Tories will make the difference.

Ken has highlighted why Greens and now why Lib Dems should vote for him second preference and why Tories who want a competent person running London should also vote for Ken first preference (1 in 10 Tories voted for Livingstone last time - even they understand the wonders Ken has done for London).

If progressive voters turn out on Thursday, Ken will win, if they don't, we will end up with a George Bush figure running London. Don't let the fascist Evening Standard (the most biased newspaper in the developed (and possibly also developing) world) win. Democracy will be poorer and the Daily Mail group even richer when Boris returns the newspaper tube contracts their way (conflict of interest and corruption are what the ES is about - it's own).

Finally, bit late on this and I apologise to the STOP BORIS group for not getting back earlier, but here is a link to their excellent video. Let's hope it helps bring enough people to their senses before Thursday.

18 comments:

  1. Have you stumbled upon why Labour is so keen on mass immigration!?!

    Boris only leads because the Yougov smaple has too few ethnic minorities!

    Would Labour have been as keen on mass immigration if most ethnic minorities voted Conservative!?!

    Claims that it helps big business conflicts with the national minimum wage!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sounds like you're stacking up the reasons for a Ken loss in advance so you can wail about how it wasn't a fair fight when he does lose.

    Turnout is the key. In spite of all the noise (even from people like you and me with no actual vote in the London mayoral election), if enough Tories can be bothered to vote, Ken will be gone. He was elected by only about 13% of the potential electorate last time.

    As an outsider, I hope Boris wins, Ken has been at it too long, he did some good things (which is why Thatcher abolished him first time around) but like the current government, he's started to believe his own hype and propoganda now.

    By the way, you aren't allowed to call him Boris - haven't you read your instructions?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Urko: I think your pretence of ever being left of centre is blown now. Anyone who wants Boris to win is not a progressive voter. Ken is so far ahead of Boris in principles, trustworthiness and right policies etc. it is scary. Boris will be a disaster. Even if you believe the Evening Standard when they lie that Ken is corrupt, why would anyone want to replace Ken with someone like Boris - who has proved himself a liar , bigot and corrupt while running not very much let alone £39bn! I call him Boris because I am a person who supports the Labour party not the other way round!

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Ken is so far ahead of Boris in principles, trustworthiness and right policies etc. it is scary."

    In which direction? Ken is corrupt and it's time for him to exit. Boris may not be an ideal mayor but he will be better than having Ken for another four, tired, crooked years.

    "Evening Standard (the most biased newspaper in the developed (and possibly also developing) world)"

    I'm not keen on the evening standard, their jounalism tends to be shoddy. However, they make no pretence about their bias, they are entitled to be so if they wish and show no more of it than the grauniad, just not in the same direction.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I thought Labour described a Ken mayoralty as a "disaster" when he was first elected!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Falco: It is not the 280,000 people who buy the ES who worry me, it is the 7 million who see their distorted anti-Ken, pro-Boris headlines on billboards around London. How is that fair? Can we call an election fair with this level of reporting bias?

    ReplyDelete
  7. snafu: I would have thought the fact new Labour dislike Ken would encourage you to support Ken?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Neil, my enemies enemy is not automatically my friend!

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Evening Standard (the most biased newspaper in the developed (and possibly also developing) world)"

    Any fair commentator could hardly describe ES as "most biased" press in developed world. The statement "possibly also developing" is simply ludicrous, and just confirms your own bias and inability to fairly judge anything.

    Perhaps if you had the ability to fairly weigh up what you are saying you might give your ramblings some credibility. There is plenty of justified criticism you could level.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Can we call an election fair with this level of reporting bias?"

    Considering that the Londoner is just as pro Ken I think there is a reasonable balance of propaganda from each side.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Falco: How can you compare the Londoner - a once monthly paper last published in February, with the daily distorted billboards from the ES?

    It is hardly a fair fight, expecially as the Londoner has to be politically neutral and print just facts, while the ES can lie its head off.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Neil I was talking about Tessa's ban on you calling him Boris did you miss that?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/04/07/ban_on_boris_feature.shtml

    ReplyDelete
  13. "the Londoner has to be politically neutral "

    The Londoner is a neutral as Terry Kelly. It's a very poor propaganda rag on behalf of Ken paid from tax money. Opposed to that you have the standard which, as a private concern, has every right to engauge in electioneering.

    ReplyDelete
  14. urko: I like the fact you use the word 'ban'. Yes I did hear it and both me and Ken refer to him as Boris because neither of us would take much notice of what Tessa says.

    Interestingly, Boris always refers to Ken as 'the Labour Mayor' because he fears Ken's personal popularity.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I think it's more a case of relishing in Labour's unpopularity.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Falco: Should the ES be allowed to litter the streets with its propaganda billboards? Do you believe in fair elections? Without a fair media we get reactionary idiots like Boris with a chance of being Mayor on a tissue of lies.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Should the ES be allowed to litter the streets with its propaganda billboards?"

    Yes, that's freedom of speech, no one promised that you would like what others said.

    "Do you believe in fair elections?"

    Yes, unlike you apparently.

    "Without a fair media we get reactionary idiots like Boris with a chance of being Mayor on a tissue of lies."

    Considering the lies and corruption that Ken has been involved in, not to mention the lies you personally have peddled about Boris, (I must just make the point that I'm not overwhelmed by him either), that is bloody rich for you to say.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Yougov were right. Since when has anyone altered their vote based on polling?

    ReplyDelete