“A citizen poll like an ice-cold shower. Only one effective option – a joint opposition list, we read in Gazeta Wyborcza. For example, Adam Michnik’s diary describes the Kantar Public research commissioned by the Forum Długi Stołu Foundation. However, there are serious doubts.
The democratic opposition has only one option to govern after the autumn elections. This is the result of a large-scale research funded by citizens
– announces “GW”.
The poll shows that it is most advantageous for the opposition to start from a single list.
Only then can Tusk, Hołownia, Kosiniak-Kamysz and Czarzasty and Biedroń count on a majority in the Sejm – 245 seats. In such a situation, PiS would have 167 seats and Konfederacja – 48 (215 in total)
we are reading.
According to this variant, KO, Lewica, Polska 2050 and PSL could get 50.9 percent. support, PiS – 36.1 percent and Confederation – 13.1 percent.
Doubts about the poll
However, it turns out that there are many question marks surrounding the research. The president of the National Investigation Group, Łukasz Pawłowski, writes in this regard not about an opinion poll, but about “civil blackmail”.
The researcher posed a number of questions in this regard:
What are the exact results of the poll? Why were the results not published (as is normally done) and only Andrzej Machowski’s calculations and calculations were published?
How many answers were given to certain parties, how many “I don’t know” answers, how many people answered “another party” and were asked “which party?” (as is done in every poll) how many rejections were there? Why were no other committees directly asked, for example the Committee of Non-Partisan Local Authorities?
Why does Andrzej Machowski only count the answers of people who state that they will “definitely go to the elections” and did he get information from Kantar that more accurate results are given by the combined answers of people who say “I would rather and definitely go to the elections” (Kantar informs other clients) and if so, why did he ignore it?
What was the final methodology of the research (information about the planned methodology disappeared from the collective page) Which committees were ultimately asked about, in what order and whether Kantar or only the client influenced the research methods?
How were the seats counted, were they counted in constituencies or using a publicly available tool that counts seats on a national scale?
As he points out:
If GW is going to discuss the results of this study, it should answer these really fundamental questions.
gah/wyborcza.pl/Twitter
Source: wPolityce
Emma Matthew is a political analyst for “Social Bites”. With a keen understanding of the inner workings of government and a passion for politics, she provides insightful and informative coverage of the latest political developments.