The title of the post that PoliticsHome is emailing to political bloggers reads:IT'S OFFICIAL: DAVID DAVIS' CAMPAIGN A TOTAL FAILURE.
I have to wonder if they chose that title in the hope of receiving the kind of reply I'm about to write.
They have produced figures from their PHI5000 showing that (in their words) the number of people who oppose 42-day detention has remained largely unchanged. If anything, it has dropped since his resignation. I don't discount the accuracy of their figures, but they are not the only figures available on this subject. To call David's campaign (officially) A TOTAL FAILURE based on their own findings is just a little misleading (to say the very least). If you were to read Iain Dale's blog today you would come to a totally different conclusion to PoliticsHome. In fact you could say that the campaign has been A TOTAL SUCCESS.
From Iain's blog:
A Joseph Rowntree/ ICM poll today has found that that 61% of people oppose detaining terrorist suspects for longer than 28 days. Four weeks ago 69% were said to support the government view on 42 days. This adds weight to the view that the more people hear about 42 days, the less they like it. The ICM poll shows that whilst 36% of those asked think people who may be guilty of a terrorist offence should be held in detention for up to six week, or 42 days, before they are charged or released, 32% say it should be up to four weeks, 13% up to two weeks, 10% up to one week and 6% up to four days.The subject of 42 days has not been out of the press since David Davis resigned. Prominent figures from all sides of the floor have given David their support. Not to mention some very serious celebrity campaigners.
I would like to suggest to PoliticsHome that - while they may have a great site, an excellent panel of political insiders and a large public opinion tracker (5000) - whoever writes the titles to their posts would probably feel more at home working for the Sunday Sport.
UPDATE: ConHome have done something similar to PolHome.
4 comments:
I was rather concerned to read that article on PoliticsHome, especially on the eve of Polling Day, and wondered whether there was an ulterior motive behind it.
Untol now I have treated PoliticsHome as an essentially unbiased resource, but my trust was quite seriously shaken by this. I too have read of the distinct shift in public opinion over the 42 days detention issue, so the PHI conclusions immediately looked suspect.
I hope this is just a slip-up on their part and not a deliberate attempt to affect turnout or the outcome at H&H tomorrow.
It's not so much of a shocker when you consider Tim Montgomerie is in favour of 42 days.
Oh! I didn't know that Tim Montgomerie was also connected with PoliticsHome. It had seemed to be fronted only by Andrew Rawnsley (whose background is perhaps not ideal, but at least he seems to represent their panel accurately enough).
If Tim M is somewhere in the background of 'PHI', then the jigsaw starts to look more complete than it would otherwise have done...
What's most depressing about this is that the analysis of the PHI5000 admits that the more ignorant people are of the subject the more likely they will support Gordon Brown's 42 days detention without trial.
It admits that the more people know about it, the less likely they are to support it ! And yet some people want to use the PHI5000 results as the last word on the subject.
Post a Comment