POLL FEVER

Lately, there has been a “galore” of polls conducted on behalf of both political parties. The results of the latest one – which was commissioned by the ruling party - were published by one Demetrius on Luciantalk and were discussed in an earlier article.

St. Lucians have become very suspicious of polls especially after the notorious one commissioned by SLP in November 2OO6 which predicted a landslide; however, when the votes were finally counted on the night of December 6, the predictions were mysteriously reversed, with UWP winning 11 seats and SLP 6 with a difference of 2000 votes between the two parties..

There is a school of thought that, had Dr Anthony called the elections just after the November public opinion poll, he would have indeed won by a landslide; and there is a lot of merit in that school of thought! But he didn’t and allowed the powerful Compton factor to set in.

The fact of the matter is scientific polls generally predict very accurately within their “margin of error”; but the reverse side of the coin is they only represent an observation at a particular point in time.

If you followed the 2OO8 US elections, you would have noticed how the polls results changed constantly depending on circumstances on the ground. McCain electability took a precipitous nosedive after his notoriously ignorant comments about the economy and Obama fully exploited that weakness. In the 2004 US elections, the same happened to Kerry for flip-flopping.

Assuming that every country’s population is statistically a normal curve, then we can expect the polling dynamics to be generally the same almost everywhere.

Since the launching of the Choiseul Powerhouse, we have been trying to gauge bloggers reactions to sundry issues by posting at least one question every now and then. We have asked a total of 1O questions and today, we will look at the responses to 5 of those questions.

Question 1: Do you believe Bousquet deserves another term?

Discussion: A whopping 96% said they did not believe Bousquet deserved another term; only 3% believed he did. It is clear that ChoiseulPowerhouse bloggers overwhelmingly reject the consideration of a third term by Bousquet.

Question 2: Do you support convicted criminals like Rufus Bousquet should be part of the Government of St. Lucia?

Discussion: The majority (86%) of the respondents did not support convicted criminals being part of the government of St. Lucia. Only 11% supported. The responses suggest that the bloggers seem to attach some degree of “ethics” to our politics and this sharply contradicts the AG’s pronouncement that politics is not the place for good boys.

Question 3: How do you rate Bousquet/Tucker’s presentation in the recently concluded budget debate?

Discussion: Only a very small percentage (9%) rated Bousquet’s presentation as “very good” with 12% percent rated it as poor. Most respondents (73%) rated it as very poor. There is a lesson there for politicians who practice grandstanding and posturing in the house of parliament, rather than focusing on the critical issues facing the nation or their constituency. But there is also an explanation to all of this: Many elected politicians are also not qualified in any academic field. Hence, they do not only pander, but they also practice wholesale charlatanism in environments which require real knowledge and expertise.

Question 4: Will Lorne Theophilus be a better District Representative than Rufus Bousquet?

Discussion: A whopping 92% said Lorne Theophilus will be a better district representative than Rufus Bousquet. Only 7% said no. This perception is highly understandable especially in view of the poor quality representation meted out to Choiseul/Saltibus. The fact is Bousquet is cramped when it comes to quality representation. His charisma is faked and he has not understood the dynamics of people’s representation; but he can bluff.

Question 5: Do you believe that Bousquet broke his mother’s arm?

Discussion: This question is a highly personal one; but because it is rapidly doing the rounds in Choiseul/Saltibus to the point where Bousquet made a statement about in the House of Assembly (He didn’t deny it), it is not just a relevant question; it is also a fair question for a number of reasons: Firstly, it has moral and ethical ramifications. Secondly it is a serious matter of criminal proportions. Thirdly, Bousquet’s mother herself broke the story to the Choiseulian vendors at the Castries market.   

These are some of the issues that will help inform your decision to vote or not to vote for a candidate in the upcoming elections.

72% of the respondents believed that Bousquet broke his mother’s arm; only 13% did not believe. 9% did not know and 4% did not care. As to whether he did it for true, he has not answered the question.