With a difference of three days (Monday to Thursday) two reputable bodies of sociological analysis published polls on voting intentions in Spain no longer divergent but quite the opposite. If the barometer of the CIS was published on 28 winner PP by a difference of 10.4 percentage points the Publiscopio day 25 was also winner PP but for a difference of 2.3 percentage points . There is a discrepancy of 8.1 points in two polls are virtually simultaneous. Is too large to pass without further and is asking some sort of explanation because it is obvious that one of the two must be false or misleading. It may even be both. What they can not be true is true or both.
Since I have no reason to doubt the competence and integrity of the two interviewers, but on the contrary, both seem very competent and professional, the reason for the discrepancy must be in the respondents. The two surveys were carried out after Zapatero announced his resignation to his third mandate. If one insists that this is the fundamental explanatory context must reach the absurd conclusion that a single cause produces adverse effects on the same medium, ie the presidential announcement moves the socialist vote and the presidential announcement does not mobilize the socialist vote . And that can not be.
The error may reside in believing that people's behavior is determined by a single cause when most likely it is by a multiplicity of them and which are to be decisive in a particular time is a matter of that, a moment. It will say that when the cause is sufficient packaging (waiver zapateril) holds sway over the long term. But that is very on in a society bombarded with information literally changing by the minute because it goes real time.
For the random sample is representative it is intended to include the percentages of well-informed, misinformed and not informed as appropriate. The problem is that there is nobody left not informed and the general level of information is very high. It is practically impossible not to find out what happens when TV screens up in meters, an important part of the written press and gives access to online information is unlimited, free (always been said that information has charges) and instantaneous.
This means that the rate of opinion change public has accelerated like everything else in the network society. Thus it appears that the fault was in believing that a Monday to a Thursday to speak of simultaneity . Not so. Three days now can be months, years. In any case, good results or not this explanation, which can not be denied is that the situation is unstable, that nothing has been decided and that the PP has not won the election. Moreover, it is possible even if Aznar continues barking his anger at the corners are preserved. And it seems to be intended to intervene many times in this campaign. This not only obscures and lanky figure Rajoy, who is already quite blurred, but, as in 2004, even without performing the person concerned, the elections become a vote on Aznar. What else is needed to awaken the sleepy vote left, center, antiaznarino? Just what you just made, that can tell again. This perspective moves much socialist and centrist vote, if the result is negative twenty-two for the PP, the party enters the zone of turbulence to the 2012 elections.
0 comments:
Post a Comment