Let’s not count our chickens, though
Published:
February 7, 2015 at 4:08pm
The slightest hint of this kind of triumphalism, and some of those who were thinking it’s too hassle to go out and vote No will think they needn’t bother after all.
24 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2015-02-07/local-news/Xarabank-survey-on-hunting-referendum-shows-No-at-44-7-and-Yes-at-35-7-6736130234
The most interesting part of the survey was the chasm between Labour and Nationalist voters on the subject.
We can count our chickens – just about the only birds many ”hunters” won’t shoot, given half a chance.
Treat the polls with a tablespoonful of salt.
They are supposed to predict results but what is certain is that they affect results by creating complacency in some voters and despair in others.
Vote, and let the pollsters be damned.
Indeed, besides polls are generally hardly reliable and the gap is quite narrow with several weeks to go.
How disappointingly close! Incredible, and saddening.
Does anyone in his right mind really believe that if the “no” vote wins , hunters trappers etc. will stop going about doing what they want and breaking the law whenever it pleases them?
Come on, pre electoral promises won’t be broken my our mighty Joe. It will first take ages to pass the bill, and even when the law is finally enacted our emperor will make sure it is not enforced.
But vote NO anyway.
“…our emperor will make sure it is not enforced” even if he has to appoint a board of three retired judges to push his elbow as he did when he wanted to get rid of a cabinet minister in charge of the police and army.
It’s a poll on Xarabank; don’t give it too much credibility.
Perhaps it may be more appropriate to changed the ‘it’ to ‘them’
It’s a survey by Maltapolls. You can examine the methodology yourself here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9uWgfoT2Yl5WjFTMzNxNnlGUE0/view?usp=sharing
Appears to be rigorous.
‘The relative majority 44.7% said that they would vote NO, for spring hunting to be banned.’
This is not very clear, is it?
How so? 44.7% is a majority relative to 35.7%, 14.3% and 5.3%. The second part of the sentence could have used a different punctuation mark like a hyphen or semicolon, but the odd phrasing of the referendum question doesn’t help very much either.
But mustn’t either side achieve 50 % + of eligible voters to win the referendum?
[Daphne – No. For the REFERENDUM to BE VALID, 50% + 1of all eligible voters MUST VOTE.]
The hunters are toying with the idea of boycotting the referendum in the hope that it will be invalidated through lack of numbers.
This is all the more reason for everyone who is going to vote ‘No’ to make it a point of voting.
Thanks for the clarification
Is the survey scientific?
Malta Today (which are usually quote accurate with surveys) had some very different numbers just a few days ago.
There could have been a shift, of course, but such a large shift in such a short time sounds unrealistic.
http://daphnecaruanagalizia.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/survey.jpg
That’s why Joseph Muscat kept insisting that he’s the underdog during the last election campaign. People need to believe that their side is losing to take the effort and vote on election day.
So all the hunters need to do is not vote at all. That’s their best option, and one I’m sure they’re contemplating.
I caught the last few seconds of Saviour’s rant on Xarabank last night. He sounded hysterical and paranoid. He’s definitely not doing the ‘No’ camp any favours (but we knew that all along).
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9uWgfoT2Yl5WjFTMzNxNnlGUE0/view?pli=1
This is the full Xarabank survey.
Xarabank survey –
Whole sample: 35.7% Yes, 44.7% No, 19.6% Und/NV
PL voters: 55.3% Yes, 30.9% No, 13.8% Und/NV
PN voters: 16.4% Yes, 78.2% No, 5.4% Und/NV
These percentages can only make sense if there is a substantial portion of the sample (at least one fifth) who did not declare their voting.
It is absolutely not possible to deduce the percentage of PL and PN voters from the information given.
The notes released with the survey say that they had to call 1600 people to get 300 answers.
Anyone know if that is normal?
If people voting No are more likely to accept to be interviewed then this survey could be seriously skewed.