The rich are smart. We are more and more enslaved but the most vulnerable have no security in terms of where they live or work. Zero hour contracts are simply a return to quasi slavery. These people are too exhausted to complain and too vulnerable to protest. There are studies all over the planet showing the exponential increase in disparity between the wealth/wages of the rich and those of the rest. People medicate themselves with cheap booze, technology and crap tv. Addiction to salt, sugar and screens starts in childhood. All deliberate. It’s shocking and depressing.
Jaysus I thought I had a bleak world view.
I doubt anyone who lived and worked in the 70’s/80’s would say they had a better lifestyle than people have now.
Depends on your definition of lifestyle. We had hand-me-downs but so had everyone. Our childhood was much more carefree than that of today’s kids. We had less stuff but more fun. There also seemed to be less assholes around.
I feel a Monty Python sketch coming on … the Four Yorkshiremen of the Apocalypse …
You mean …
Give us a break , we were so poor we didnt know any difference. We are now one of the wealthiest countries in the world ,30/40 years we were the poor man of europe .Going back even futher to the 50s and 60s, my ma worked in England for a while and she told me she was called a ‘biddy’ cause she came from ireland .
That happened my granny too. But her name was Biddy.
Great little country to earn more than ever in.
SOB/ Red C manipulate their results due to them getting the GE so badly wrong, they discount working class and young voters as they are less likely to vote. My only issue with it is they don’t publish the raw data.
Red C was no less or more accurate than any other polling company in 2016.
They all had FG and SF on higher share than they got - Red C had SF on 20% two weeks before election - and all under-estimated FF.
Nothing to do with manipulation. They do breakdowns on socio-economic status. More to do with “shy” FF voters, and lazy Shinners added to fact that they wither once exposed to democratic debate.
They were by far the furthest polling Co off in the GE and reacted by amending the discount factors applied to certain socioeconomic groups. ie there data manipulations. again I have not issue with this if its transparent but its not. It has also led to them being more then 10pts off in the repeal referendum and way off in the presidential election. Actually when you look at it like that they really are very poor at their job.
But hay you know best.
It still doesn’t address the original post of why there is such a difference in the two polls in relation to SF. But looking at the breakdown of Sunday Times one SF are neck and neck with FG and FF in the unaltered section… In other words of the 990 people polled 26% said they would vote SF, with ditto for FF and 28% for FG. They also show a big change in demographics as to where that increase in support comes from, which is the 35-54 age group, who are more likely to vote. I think this is significant and I believe the other parties have noticed this also hence the saturation of anti SF sentiment by them in the days since that poll… As this tread proves they are more talked about than any other party!!
They were not “10 pts off in the repeal referendum”!
They were 1.1% off in last poll.
You just keep making stuff up when others present arguments based on fact. If you have proof of “data manipulations” you should cite evidence. or indeed bring it to law.
But, of course you do not.
when they striped back to the raw data and not used their discount factor that they apply when publishing polls they were accurate. What they publish had an error of 10% and they admit it in your link.
Again my point is they are not publishing the raw data and its why there are massive deviations between them and other polling results.
We therefore look to our Wisdom of Crowd analysis to help us understand the real dynamic behind claimed voter intention. The Crowd predictions suggest a Yes vote of 56% and a No vote of 44%. This is potentially a much closer result than suggested by the claimed vote intention, with a 11% swing from yes to No. That tells us that despite our target suggesting they will vote Yes in greater numbers they are very conscious that many of their friends and family will vote No. It gives further credence to our decision to allocate at least 80-90% of the undecided voters to the No camp. Overall then we expect the Yes vote to be in and around 56%-58% at this stage, and barring any major interventions in the campaign over the next week that is the most likely result. Still enough for the Yes camp to win the referendum, but closer than top line vote intentions suggest
Polls should be banned. They serve no real purpose and if anything can/could be used to subvert democracy.
If your actually interested and not just being your usually bias self the below quick article explains some of Red C’s manipulation of the data
Personally I have no issue with them but no one ever seems to call out when they are wrong. if the massive differences remain between RedC and Ipsos MRBI the post mortem after the next election will be interesting.
I agree with those who say SF & other Smaller parties tend to perform better in polls but in the Irish case I would have through lack of candidates(or paper candidates) in some constancies would be more of a factor then what Red C are doing but I guess time will tell. Also FF & FG have much stronger local organisations outside Dublin to the rest, which can not be underestimated in a parochial country.
Not sure about banning all polls … I had one who was a plumber he came around and did a few jobs in the house for a very reasonable price.
That’s racist or at least Poll-ist!