<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pollwatch – State of the Parties: Lib Dems 18%, Labour 31%, Tories 38% (Mar. 2010 so far)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.libdemvoice.org/pollwatch-state-of-the-parties-lib-dems-18-labour-31-tories-38-mar-2010-so-far-18431.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.libdemvoice.org/pollwatch-state-of-the-parties-lib-dems-18-labour-31-tories-38-mar-2010-so-far-18431.html</link>
	<description>Our place to talk - an independent website for supporters of the Liberal Democrat party in the UK.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 08:55:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Tall</title>
		<link>http://www.libdemvoice.org/pollwatch-state-of-the-parties-lib-dems-18-labour-31-tories-38-mar-2010-so-far-18431.html#comment-111506</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Tall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:43:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=18431#comment-111506</guid>
		<description>@ paul barker - 14th chosen as cut-off point only because I was covering the first fortnight&#039;s polls.

@ Ed Randall - &#039;Others&#039; are indeed an unknown factor. My guess is they&#039;ll attract a few more votes this time, but will be so thinly spread as to make little difference - tho there will be individual constituencies where that&#039;s not the case.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ paul barker &#8211; 14th chosen as cut-off point only because I was covering the first fortnight&#8217;s polls.</p>
<p>@ Ed Randall &#8211; &#8216;Others&#8217; are indeed an unknown factor. My guess is they&#8217;ll attract a few more votes this time, but will be so thinly spread as to make little difference &#8211; tho there will be individual constituencies where that&#8217;s not the case.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed Randall</title>
		<link>http://www.libdemvoice.org/pollwatch-state-of-the-parties-lib-dems-18-labour-31-tories-38-mar-2010-so-far-18431.html#comment-111504</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed Randall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=18431#comment-111504</guid>
		<description>Stephen, I take your point that most of the poll results in this sample suggest a steady state up to mid March. 

The Tory series - given a leader who is still viewed favourably but a substantial part of the UK electorate - must make pretty depressing reading from their point of view. The apparent poll ceiling for them suggests that many electors simply don&#039;t believe that the Tories have/can change their spots.

Labour results are a different matter. The pollsters face practical as well as methodological problems in getting at Labour support. YouGov has made a change to boost the share of firm Labour in its polls. The problems of weighting to take account of differential turnout are harder than ever - especially where potential Labour voters are concerned. 

LibDem support, putting Opinium to one side, has been consistent and - if leader approval ratings are a measure of potential - then there is considerable scope for a LibDem campaign bounce. 

What hasn&#039;t received all the attention it should have - and has been much less stable than the Tory and LibDem shares across polls - is support for Others. My guess is that dealignment /weakening of party identification and the related willingness to vote UKIP, BNP and Green in England is going to have a much bigger impact on the 2010 General Election than conventional (newsprint and TV) political commentaries have so far suggested.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stephen, I take your point that most of the poll results in this sample suggest a steady state up to mid March. </p>
<p>The Tory series &#8211; given a leader who is still viewed favourably but a substantial part of the UK electorate &#8211; must make pretty depressing reading from their point of view. The apparent poll ceiling for them suggests that many electors simply don&#8217;t believe that the Tories have/can change their spots.</p>
<p>Labour results are a different matter. The pollsters face practical as well as methodological problems in getting at Labour support. YouGov has made a change to boost the share of firm Labour in its polls. The problems of weighting to take account of differential turnout are harder than ever &#8211; especially where potential Labour voters are concerned. </p>
<p>LibDem support, putting Opinium to one side, has been consistent and &#8211; if leader approval ratings are a measure of potential &#8211; then there is considerable scope for a LibDem campaign bounce. </p>
<p>What hasn&#8217;t received all the attention it should have &#8211; and has been much less stable than the Tory and LibDem shares across polls &#8211; is support for Others. My guess is that dealignment /weakening of party identification and the related willingness to vote UKIP, BNP and Green in England is going to have a much bigger impact on the 2010 General Election than conventional (newsprint and TV) political commentaries have so far suggested.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul barker</title>
		<link>http://www.libdemvoice.org/pollwatch-state-of-the-parties-lib-dems-18-labour-31-tories-38-mar-2010-so-far-18431.html#comment-111447</link>
		<dc:creator>paul barker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 20:36:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=18431#comment-111447</guid>
		<description>What made you choose the 14th as a cut off point ? Theres been another 9 polls since then, averageing 
19.2%. Another 2 tonight, probably.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What made you choose the 14th as a cut off point ? Theres been another 9 polls since then, averageing<br />
19.2%. Another 2 tonight, probably.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Aloysius St</title>
		<link>http://www.libdemvoice.org/pollwatch-state-of-the-parties-lib-dems-18-labour-31-tories-38-mar-2010-so-far-18431.html#comment-111428</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Aloysius St</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:31:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=18431#comment-111428</guid>
		<description>Jack

I&#039;m not saying I think YouGov is necessarily wrong - just that there are so many YouGov polls in the list that they will dominate the average, in a way they won&#039;t have done in previous months.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jack</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not saying I think YouGov is necessarily wrong &#8211; just that there are so many YouGov polls in the list that they will dominate the average, in a way they won&#8217;t have done in previous months.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack Holroyde</title>
		<link>http://www.libdemvoice.org/pollwatch-state-of-the-parties-lib-dems-18-labour-31-tories-38-mar-2010-so-far-18431.html#comment-111425</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack Holroyde</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=18431#comment-111425</guid>
		<description>Equally, they have been out of sync with other polls for some time- but often show themselves to be right.
The black sheep isn&#039;t always wrong - it might be that they know something we dont...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Equally, they have been out of sync with other polls for some time- but often show themselves to be right.<br />
The black sheep isn&#8217;t always wrong &#8211; it might be that they know something we dont&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Aloysius St</title>
		<link>http://www.libdemvoice.org/pollwatch-state-of-the-parties-lib-dems-18-labour-31-tories-38-mar-2010-so-far-18431.html#comment-111423</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Aloysius St</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:49:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.libdemvoice.org/?p=18431#comment-111423</guid>
		<description>There&#039;s a problem with a simple average of all the polls, though. With YouGov producing 5 polls a week, nearly two thirds of those you&#039;re averaging come from a single pollster, and one which has generally seemed out of step with the others.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s a problem with a simple average of all the polls, though. With YouGov producing 5 polls a week, nearly two thirds of those you&#8217;re averaging come from a single pollster, and one which has generally seemed out of step with the others.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

