The Polls – Are they anything more than Disraeli’s ‘statistics’?
A foreign client asked us recently:
 “We have been hearing so much about the UK General Election recently, could you clarify what is going on.”
 Oh dear, we all groaned:
 “The Conservatives were bound to win” he continues “and then their poll lead shrinks and then they are looking good again and then it’s definitely a Labour victory. Now we hear Hung Parliament. Each day there is a new story: What is going on?”
This is probably the most challenging question public affairs execs face at the moment. I dread it because everyone has a different opinion based on a poll they have read, which assures them of a certain scenario.
 This is being fuelled by newspapers and political blogs publishing a huge volume of headline opinion poll figures, which seem to directly contradict each other.
 But I actually do not agree that the picture is so cloudy. I actually think that the emerging polls are, in many ways, relatively consistent, but there are factors that are clouding the picture.
So at the risk of developing an eggy face below I explain what I think will happen at the General Election and what is clouding the picture:
 1. The ignored indicators - When you dig below the surface of tabloid headlines to less interesting polling numbers, a consistent picture of the General Election emerges:
 a. The Labour Party has lost a great deal of the voters who voted for them in 2005; the Conservative Party have retained most of their supporters
b. National polls have shown that since 2006 the percentage of people who want a change of Government has stayed broadly the same - 70%
c. Polls and indicators from key marginal seats, which if won would ensure a good election result for the Conservative Party do not tally with the fluctuations recorded at national level. From my experiences the situation is far more consistent and is positive for David Cameron.
 So why do we ignore these numbers:
 2. The Role of Newspapers - Each national newspaper realises that in Election season new polling figures create a great headline. The Sunday Times carried the story of the Conservative lead shrinking to 2 points and immediately had a hook that ensured their newspaper was picked up by inquisitive voters. Yet, these headline poll numbers are taken out of context. We rarely read the scale of the survey; the immediate context or the questions that people are asked. We just see the headline figure and absorb it into our consciousness, thinking it is definitive when it is not. Unless you realise the situation the poll was created in how can you tell what it means?
Weighing these factors up I believe that the Conservative Party are on to win the General Election with a majority. I do believe that the hype of the election campaign means people are fluctuating in their opinion of the national parties and their leaders when asked in national polls.
But I think that this ignores the fact that on Election Day people will be forced to choose who they want to represent them in their constituency and the signs suggest that they will vote for a change. Whether they will vote for the reformed Conservative Party is an important issue, but I think in order to facilitate a change of Government floating voters will be prepared to vote for the Conservative Party. I think people do want to get rid of Gordon Brown and want a new Government.
I could be proved wrong, but I agree with a politician who told me recently that: “when the British people decide they want a change, they normally make sure it happens”. This is what the polls suggest and this is my prediction.
Tags: conservative, David Cameron, General Election, Gordon Brown, labour, polls, sunday times
Digg It | Reddit | De.lic.ious
Comments (1)
March 16th, 2010 at 5:28 pm Posted by Ged Carroll
I think that you may have a point.
Firstly, I don’t think that it will be a digital election because none of the parties have managed to empower and engage consumers - with that in mind traditional media will be largely determining the agenda.
Secondly the sleaze advantage that Labour had in the 1997 election is well and truly spent. The expenses debacle has tainted the public perception of all MPs with a largely unfounded whiff of sleaze. This isn’t going to be helped by the amount of lobbyists going up as prospective parliamentary candidates like BPI director of public affairs Richard Mollett. The lobbying profession like PR is tainted in the public perception with connotations of ’spin’ a la Lord Mandelson and Alistair Campbell. Overall the public mood is apathy and anger. The conservatives have traditionally been better at getting their loyal people to the polls.
Thirdly, the LibDems split over the digital economy bill could lose them a small but significant amount of votes.
Finally the lack of a ‘blue water’ between labour and conservative thinking from a consumer point-of-view takes a way the guilt over voting tory which came about with the rise of Margaret Thatcher. This is partly due to the background of David Cameron as a PR person, who whilst been criticised as lightweight has managed to paper over historic cracks.
The wild cards in the mix are Respect and the BNP, both of which could cause upsets in traditional Labour constituencies.
Post Your Comment