Originally Posted by
NWIFlyer
[MENTION=3353]IAN-UK[/MENTION], thank you, this is extremely useful and interesting. Would you be kind enough to provide a link to the data, as presumably that contains all the responses? I'd be interested to take a look at the responses to the more extreme options to see how the percentages were arrived at.
I don't have an alternative view particularly, it's just that we can all cite examples where poll companies have rather badly got it wrong, or the question they have been instructed to ask by the commissioning media organisation has been somewhat loaded. Now I get that poll companies are regulated, and these sort of things shouldn't happen in theory - but they do.
It's why presenting a contrary view which questions the veracity of the results if they seem miles out of kilter isn't ever a bad thing, and indeed we've seen other people in this thread who state they've seen polls which give vastly different results.
The poll is neither miles out of kilter with previous polls nor are they miles out of kilter with the scientific consensus on how to go forward.
The only thing they are miles out of kilter with would appear to be the direction the U.K. government appears to be going.
I get that it is not government job’s simply to be an empty vessel to reflect the transient position of the people, and as I said I expect/hope the views of those who see a need for substantial restrictions forever will change as things improve. But there is a huge between that and trying to say the poll results are not representative.