Monday, March 05, 2012

On subtle effects

I'm not the first to make the point, but I'll briefly wade into the Frank Graves vs. Nik Nanos debate over Robocon by noting why this may be a scandal which may have far more of an impact on Canadians' perceptions than prorogation or contempt of Parliament.

In those cases, while political observers were quick to recognize the seriousness of the Cons' intrusion on democracy, issues about the Cons stonewalling Parliament may not have been seen to bear any link to the daily reality of Canadians - especially the "least informed, least engaged voters" who don't much follow politics between elections. And that distance between the Cons' actions and anything which could connect to everyday experiences made it easy for voters to forget about them.

But the nuisance of unwanted marketing phone calls is a constant reality for...well, pretty much everybody. And if each annoying call gets linked even slightly in the minds of Canadians to the Harper Cons, that subtle annoyance factor may make a world of difference when voters who don't think much about politics decide who seems like an acceptable choice in 2015.

4 comments:

  1. Dan Tan4:23 p.m.

    When political addicts serve polls to each other like Tennis balls...I wish they'd keep one thing in mind: If politically engaged voters ignore marketting calls from their own political parties (which they paid to join)...imagine their contempt for unsolicited calls from pollsters (who don't identify themselves as pollsters on call-display).

    Pre-election polling needs to be kept in context...realizing that the type of people responding are not reflective of the average-voter who'd be more inclined to respond during an actual election campaign.

    Face-to-face research is another matter. I'm not sure either Nano or Graves do that kind of thing...

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dan Tan4:58 p.m.

    Greg.

    You've mentioned the problematic nature of polling here. As have I over there:
    http://accidentaldeliberations.blogspot.com/2012/02/leadership-2012-roundup_23.html

    But none of that even matters. What kind of an idiot thinks polling matters at this stage?

    We're only in the infancy of a scandal. The public will only react after the judge yells: "GUILTY!".

    ReplyDelete
  3. jurist5:44 p.m.

    To clarify, I wouldn't suggest for a second that polling doesn't matter in some sense. It's certainly worth being cautious about reading too much into any given poll - but it's equally dangerous to ignore what may be valuable information about public perceptions, particularly if it might not be obvious absent polling done on a particular question.

    That said, it is fair to say that the poll numbers on Robocon in particular matter far less right now than the story yet to unfold - even if it's understandable that pollsters want to carve out a piece of the story for themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dan Tan10:51 p.m.

    I was referring to the Hill Times article, not you.

    OT, Karl Belanger is proven right again. The Hill Times cleverly chooses to detail the lower Nanos NDP number, while avoiding any mention of the higher Ekos number...and that's in an article comparing Nanos & Ekos.

    For months now, Karl has been following the polls, their clear discrepancies, and the fact that only the ones with higher Liberal numbers get reported.

    ReplyDelete