So YouGov are getting into push-polling now? That's an American import we could certainly do without...

In Edinburgh the Lib Dem/SNP gang have done very badly. Totalitarianism like you have never seen. After having these monkeys in charge, worse than the previous Labour gang there is NO WAY I'D VOTE LIB DEM. Convince me otherwise. Unapproachable, ignorant, enter into contracts which cannot be contract because there cannot be an agreement, wasting money like water, lying to the suckers on the street, regular mis-information and cover ups. Funny enough that the LD'S demanded an investigation into the £400k from the City Connect project which vanished into thin air. That was while Labour was in power. Once they got in they appeared to develop amnesia about the £400k.

This is not surprising. Nobody but the Tories are allowed to complete full sentences on Sky News either, so the next debate with Adam Boulton, the worst offender, is certain to be a mess. I thought trying to influence voting for personal and monetary gain was a crime?

"Murdoch"...

http://tinyurl.com/y8nhxu5

11.39am anon poster

How can I convince you something is not true, when your allegations contain not a shred of detail on specific cases?

Sadly for all the LibDems salivating at the moment, the surge will be a blip whether Murdoch manipulates the polls or not.

The problem is that less than 25% of the electorate actually saw the debate and only half of them thought that Clegg was the best performer.

Conclusion: the surge in LibDem support is based largely on hearsay and the desperation for a viable alternative to Brown or Cameron. It is largely not based on anything substantive, although I ddo accept that it may push the shaare of the vote up by a couple oof points in the end analysis.

Unfortunately, the LibDems, although they may be a useful coalition partner, are not a viable alternative mostly because they themselves have not even considered the possibilty of governing in their own right.

Almost everything Clegg says bears little scrutiny but this is not an issue when he is seen primarily as a vehicle of protest.

Methinks Clegg really needed a one-off debate to come the Thursday before polling day. Expectation is everything
and from here on in, Clegg can only disappoint for a host of reasons.

To be honest, I have no time for either Brown or Cameron but I think it is outrageous that Clegg should have been given this golden opportunity to present himself as the only alternative when there are plenty more (and more radical) options out there such as UKIP, SNP/Plaid, Greens etc.

Forgot to say, if you really want to understand just how unreliable individual polls can be check this out:

http://scotgoespop.blogspot.com/2010/04/quite-possibly-most-bizarre-opinion.html

Manipulation or incompetence?

"Murdoch, using highly leveraged funds, purchased the 20th Century Fox movie studios, which he used to spawn the fourth national television network, Fox-TV, which has outlets in all major media markets."...

http://tinyurl.com/y37jnoz

"Mass Media, Mass Entertainment, Mass Brainwashing"...

tinyurl.com/yyncv7k

Oscar

See my earlier posts. The polls showed a LibDem surge of 4 to 7% in the tow days before the debate. It's not just one TV appearance.

Have a look at the previous one. Again a set of leading questions to counter the SNP.

The days immediately prior to the debate covered the LibDem manifesto launch and, just as at conference time, the increased exposure brings a modest surge in support.

The debate has allowed this to be built on a bit. Time will tell, but I am sure we will find it is mostly transient.

Amusingly, both Tories and Labour have decided to ratchet up the pressure on the LDs; yes, that's right, gang up on the underdog - I'm sure the public will applaud that move.

There's an old saying - never interrupt your enemy when they're doing something wrong.

What's happened to Larry, I wonder? He seems to have evanesced since the host of this blog announced that he was re-joining the LibDems. Perhaps this is because naturally with the General Election coming-up and with the LibDem connection, much of the posting now concerns internal UK politics and he's meant to be from St Louis in the USA. Or perhaps...

And where's 'John Cord'? He made one statement a few weeks ago which might possibly have been perceived as a direct threat to the wife of the host of the blog, and then like the Cheshire Cat, he vanished, leaving only his smile.

"Well, well," said the man in the raincoat, before intoning, "It rains regularly in Georgia on Sundays, but only in leap years."

And the other, identical man in the raincoat answered:
"The tickets are rectangular this time around."

They were in the same raincoat.

Methinks Oscar misses the point. Of course we all see events like the debate through our own prism, distorting (if not eliminating) the reality. It is not yet clear whether the debate will sustain this election as a real game changer; the two party system is so deeply embedded and offers permanent and sustained advantage against any newcomer regardless of their perspective, ability or quality of programme.

At a general election, everything told to the voter, drilled into them says that there are only two parties able to win, competetent to govern. Whatever qualities a contender may have, you waste your vote if you choose not to hold your nose and pick one of the two; otherwise you don't influence the contest. Despite the alleged intelligence of the electorate it doesn't really come down to much more than that.

Now all of a sudden the electorate is being told that maybe this was wrong. Looks like lots of credible people are saying that Nick is a real contender. And a few polls have started to put the three parties neck and neck.

That doesn't mean that a Liberal Democrat victory in the popular vote or a government is very likely but it means that they are in the game now and they have the opportunity to present ideas on the same playing field as the others. Whether Lib Dem high command is smart enough to promote the more radical end of liberalism to differential them in policy terms is though still up for debate...

"What's happened to Larry, I wonder? ... And where's 'John Cord'?"

Has dreoilin really gone ? I'd miss her.

Why has this blog gone from being a mildly interesting foreign affairs blog with insight from a former ambassador, to being an angry Lib Dem rant blog? To think I wrote my MA Dissertation about you as well!!

@AJS
Umm. What makes you think you have the right to demand that anyone's personal blog should remain on the topic that personally interests you or subscribes to your political slant?

I mean honestly... just stop reading it if you don't like it. Or, as a suggestion; politely request that you'd like to see more blog posts on a particular subject.

Craig, the comment you refer to is now #270 (how it could go up not down is a mystery - out of sync insertions?).

Anyhow, as a former market research professional with a degree in psychology, I am amazed that Kellner's Yougov can get away with this. It breaks all the rules of social research protocol.

Then again, not a word from the Market Research Society, as usual.

ScouseBilly

Yes. My own comment moved from 280 to 282 - not sure where it is now.

I am stunned about YouGov too. Kellner just seeing an opportunity to throw over integrity and coin it?

AJS,

Wll I was a Lib Dem member throughout my diplomatic career (assuming that's what your MA thesis was about) and had been since I joined the Liberals in 1973.

I still want to be able to influence foreign policy rather than just complain about it.

Nice to see you back George.

Murdoch ensures all his editors sing from the same hymn sheet. All 179 of his newspapers supported the smashing of Iraq because 'Murdering Murdoch' believed that deposing the Iraqi leader, displacing 4,000,000 Iraqi people and murdering thousands of Iraqi kids would lead to cheaper oil.

He said, "The greatest thing to come out of this for the world economy...would be $20 a barrel for oil. That's bigger than any tax cut in any country." "Once it [Iraq] is behind us, the whole world will benefit from cheaper oil which will be a bigger stimulus than anything else."

Your time is soon up 'Murdering Murdoch' and your entertainment empire in the UK will crumble when 'Utility Warehouse' gains enough power to destroy your UK hold on it's people.

Start living the nightmare, while disabled, disfigured and traumatised Iraqi kids curse your very existence.

Your 'hackman' Andy Coulson at £450,000/year will ensure the Conservative Party demise and your support of Zionist extremists will ensure your place in purgatory with your best friend Sharon.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=113749985304255

Have you joined the party (no not that one).

ok, ive worked it out now, sorry for the spamming :-) click the link below and come and join the party.

Craig Murray - According to Anthony Wells of YouGov on his own UK Polling Report site (thread YouGov/Sunday Times at 2.15) the YouGov question was in a private poll (presumably for the Tories or some associated group) to see how this line of attack would go down.

Very well with the libel lawyers judging from some of the replies on UKPR.

He also said the question was also asked after voting intention was established so it wasn't an attempt to change that.

I believe this post to be a blatant lie. YouGov would never put a question like that, suggesting thatClegg himself said he had taken money from a criminal. Nobody at YouGov is as stupid and illiterate as the person who wrote that rubbish.

Jack

You didn't read the comment immediately above yours. It appears You Gov are admitting they asked this question.

You Gov claim they asked it after not before asking voting intention. The person who (accurately) gave the information that he had been asked this question, specifically says they asked it before asking voting intention.

Either way, a total disgrace for You Gov.

"Craig, the comment you refer to is now #270 (how it could go up not down is a mystery - out of sync insertions?)."

I expect earlier posts had been held back for moderation but have now been inserted. They go in order of submission, not order of appearance.

IMO a blog that numbers its posts should assign a number at submission (before moderation) and not subsequently change it. There will be gaps in the numbers that appear on the Web page but it would not break referring to other posts.

Craig/Jack

To be fair to YouGov if it's a private poll, clients are entitled to ask whatever they like. YouGov and the other pollsters only apply their standards when polls are going to be published and their name as pollsters associated with it.

Remember most polling done by these organisations is commercial and this would be treated as an example of this. Opinion polls are almost like loss-leaders for pollsters - they put their names before the public and the firms that might use them.

There's no evidence that this poll was ever to used in public (the tip off came from someone being polled) and I suspect YouGov would play hell with any client who subsequently released the results of a private poll as if it came via YouGov.

Thinking about the placement of the voting intention question, I wonder now if it was asked at the beginning and the end of the list to see if the "information" had any effect.

Ah, push polling. Everything I Know About Politics, I Learned From the West Wing, part 2572.

Craig - It was on The Sandline Affair and the Privatisation of Security in North Africa.
As for the blog, I never demanded anything - I just mentioned that you are sounding like one of those 16 year olds who has just discovered a political party and doesn't hush down about it and how right they are and how wrong the others are and how they're gonna win soooo big.

Who was/ is 'John Cord'? Who was/ is 'Larry'? Anyone know? Larry... Mr Cord.... are either of you there?

Dreoilin will be back, I suspect, like Fu Manchu or Gandalf the Grey.

AJS, an interesting and (literally) courageous thesis. Has it been published yet?

Yep was published in Sep 2001

YouGov have been routinely manipulating polls for some time now, particularly in Scotland to damage the SNP. They conceded they misrepresented their Scottish polls by underestimating SNP support by 6 points and overestimating Labour by the same amount THEN THEY JUST CONTINUED TO DO EXACTLY THE SAME IN ALL SUCCEEDING SCOTTISH POLLS which are widely reported by virtually all the "Scottish" media. The day following a YouGove poll showing Labour 16 points ahead of SNP Ipsos Mori published a comprehensive poll showing SNP and Labour neck and neck. The Mail has supressed a poll showing SNP ahead (check the Holyrood magazine)yet YouGov today have Labour 18 points ahead of SNP with the Tories on the SNP's heels. This is laughable stuff it it didn't represent a serious attack on democracy which is being encouraged by the unionist parties.
No serious political figure takes YouGov figures seriously in Scotland now.

My own private survey in the Richmond Park constituency shows that the majority of residents of Petersham are supporting the Lib Dem candidate Susan Kramer.

They've got her signs up.

There's a couple of ridiculously rich people on the Hill and down Queens Road who seem to be supporting the Non Dom Tax Refugee Tory candidate, Zac.

I done this survey on the 371 bus from Kingston and provide it free and without prejudice to all who may wish to use it.

I'm available to do do other surveys from the bus, to all interested agencies.

My fees are £6 for a day travel card, £5 for a meal in Wetherspoons, and a tenner for a few pints.

Contact me at BusPoll, "a new way of doing it". That's my catchphrase.

Iain Dale has noticed that the Tory party and its friends are getting desperate after Cameron's baleful performance.

He cautions them thusly:

"Personal attacks on Nick Clegg will not work. They will backfire on those who make them and rightly so. Everyone who knows Nick Clegg likes him. He's a transparently likeable individual. Anyone trying to make out that he's anything else will come a cropper."

Iain's not quite so dim as he often seems.

Perhaps he thinks there are more subtle ways of attacking Nick?

"My fees are £6 for a day travel card, £5 for a meal in Wetherspoons, and a tenner for a few pints."

"Contact me at BusPoll, "a new way of doing it". That's my catchphrase."

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

My fees are £3,000 to £5,000 for a day.

Contact me at New Labour, "an old way of doing it". That's my catchphrase.

Can you do another post making this all a little bit clearer for the layman to understand. Do that and we can spread this like wildfire.

omg! the wording is that questiion is disgusting for a supposedly unbiased poll.

YouGov may be breaching Market Research Society rules/code of conduct. Might be worth checking out. www.mrs.org.uk

What is the relationship between
Sealo and the LibDems?

To me this is too much of a gift to be taken at face value. What do you think? Is the LibDem election machine in overdrive or just over the top?

Si the intention of YouGov to make LDs look good, then look poorer and poorer in the polls as May 8th draws nearer?

Aelfrith,

I don't know sealo from Adam, but I think he was just a punter who got sampled by YouGov. The key point you are missing is that YouGove have confirmed they asked the question - that much is not in dispute.

I am a LibDem member myself, just a humble footsoldier.

Interesting from David Yelland (former Sun editor):

At the Sun, we deliberately ignored the Lib Dems. The cosy pro-Cameron press may now be left floundering

I doubt if Rupert Murdoch watched the election debate last week. His focus is very firmly on the United States, especially his resurgent Wall Street Journal. But if he did, there would have been one man totally unknown to him. One man utterly beyond the tentacles of any of his family, his editors or his advisers. That man is Nick Clegg.

Make no mistake, if the Liberal Democrats actually won the election – or held the balance of power – it would be the first time in decades that Murdoch was locked out of British politics. In so many ways, a vote for the Lib Dems is a vote against Murdoch and the media elite.

Have you selectively quoted Anthony Wells' response in order to give the impression that he acknowledges the anti-Lib Dem questions were part of the Sun poll and asked before a VI question?

Because thats what it looks like.

athirat -

no, and I've given the link so you can see for yourself. I have specifically noted that he said the voting intention question should have been asked first, so how you can say I implied he agreed it was asked after is beyond me.

The much more interesting question is - who paid for this push polling? Murdoch or the Tories?

Craig, you appear to be implying (or, in fact, flat-out saying) that YouGov have used this question in a poll whose results will be published as part of their Daily Tracker in the The Sun. You've also stated, as fact, that this is a deliberate move by YouGov to shift the media narrative and momentum away from the Lib Dems. You're also accusing YouGov of quite serious political bias.

And, as athirat says, you selectively quoted Anthony Wells saying that the question was asked, without mentioning Wells' further detail that "neither those VI or those question were anything to do with polling for newspapers or publication".

YouGov have now stated that the poll in question was private, not intended for publishing, and is entirely unrelated to the Daily Tracker. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/19/yougov-survey-nick-clegg-attack

So if the poll was not being paid for by a newspaper, was not intended for newspaper publication, and was not related to the YouGov/The Sun daily tracker, how exactly does Murdoch enter into this, and how can the poll be a deliberate attempt to 'stop Lib Dem momentum'?

Push-polling is the dubious US Republican Party trick of disguising a smear campaign as a legitimate phone poll, and especially targeting swing voters in marginals. Nasty back-door tactics like that say a lot about the people it's being done for.

11:39 anon poster

They are not allegations as you suggest, but fact. Tram project over time and over budget. Who enters into that type of agreement. It was supposed to be a contract. How can it be a contract when the price keeps changing.

Same sex adoptions. purely satanic, and defended by the Lib Dem mob, no consideration for the boy involved and the long terms effects of such a move.

Hollie Greig - Covered up by all in the Scottish establishment, including Lib Dems, where was Tavish on that one?

I am sorry to raise this with you direct. These matters are going on all the time,some get uncovered most do not.

Before I go, what is your position on opening the Dunblane Inquiry papers to the public? That file may contain potential criminal conduct by the establishment

Anyone with sense can see that the Tories are hugely unpopular.

Its just the die hard Right wingers voting for them.

Check the cyber space links.

Sorry forgot the link:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=40556497527#!/group.php?gid=40556497527&v=wall

I would like to say as there is a good idea but rather more because they inherently can not resist it because the tories will push the immigration as well as the crime angle.

Tories are assholes. What can they do? BOOM F**KALL BOOM F**KALL

This is truly stunning. It's one thing to endorse a party, it's another to massage poll figures by telling voters fraudulent statements.

In case you're wondering 'his own party issued guidance on how to fiddle the expenses system?' is slander. It assigns a motive which was not there.

I have gone through this blog. I found it very interesting and helpful. Nowadays I am completing my online degree course from home.
So this blog really doing great for me.

online degree

Could YouGov have a built-in anti-LibDem bias? Consider the following:
One of YouGov's two co-founders is standing as a Tory candidate in the safe seat of Stratford-on-Avon. He is Nadhim Zahawi, who is of Iraqi Kurdish origin. He was also YouGov's chief executive officer until standing aside so he could focus on his election campaign.
The Labour link is that Chairman Peter Kellner's spouse is Labour's Baroness Ashton. She is the EU "foreign minister".
Are there not clear, or at least possible, conflicts of interest that could shape the way questions are posed and questionnaires designed for publication in the rabidly anti-Clegg Sun?