Showing posts with label bar charts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bar charts. Show all posts
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Monday, November 08, 2010
Oldham East & Saddleworth by-election: First Dodgy Bar Chart Spotted!
... and I am thrilled to say that the LibDems have given us our first dodgy bar chart of the new "dodgy bar chart season" (i.e. a parliamentary by-election). Even though we haven't even got a date for the Oldham seat vacated by former Labour MP Phil Wollas, this gem has appeared on their website. Notice how the Conservatives don't even get a bar? Wow! They must be so far behind they don't even warrant the extra graphic or ink on the page. Surely those honest souls at the LibDems aren't trying to cover something up are they ...
| Phil Woolas | Labour | 14,186 | 31.9 | -10.7 |
| Elwyn Watkins | Liberal Democrat | 14,083 | 31.6 | -0.5 |
| Kashif Ali | Conservative | 11,773 | 26.4 | +8.7 |
Gosh. Would you believe it - a three way marginal seat where the Tory vote rose considerably and the LibDem vote went down in 2010! I would never have been able to tell that from the bar chart ... thank goodness for Google. I'm sure the LibDems wouldn't want to mislead people either, so no doubt this little error will be cleared up soon ...
Come on LibDems, this election is being held in the interest of clean and fair elections. Maybe your campaign ought to reflect that too?
Sunday, November 07, 2010
Ridiculous Claims Pt. 133
Most people in politics really dislike LibDem campaigning tactics; and of all of them, the way that they claim to be able to win in every ward, division, council or constituency in the country irrespective of the previous results, is the biggest irritant. Bar charts being flung here and there - if you stats don't prove your point, use a dodgy scale that will or even in some cases use stats from a completely different area!
But now I think the mantle for bonkers claims of electoral success should be handed onto the Green Party. With their massive tally of ... erm ... 1 MP they are now predicting big gains in the Scottish Parliament including winning seats in every region (see here). Most people in the country aren't even bothered by the Greens but here in Norwich we've had years upon years of idiotic claims of them about to make an historic breakthrough (that never happen). Be it the parliamentary seat or the local council, there is no claim too big for them to make.
But now I think the mantle for bonkers claims of electoral success should be handed onto the Green Party. With their massive tally of ... erm ... 1 MP they are now predicting big gains in the Scottish Parliament including winning seats in every region (see here). Most people in the country aren't even bothered by the Greens but here in Norwich we've had years upon years of idiotic claims of them about to make an historic breakthrough (that never happen). Be it the parliamentary seat or the local council, there is no claim too big for them to make.
Monday, March 22, 2010
"LibDems not playing fair"
The public really are becoming wise to the tactics of some parties who seek to mislead. I have just had a very angry email from one local resident who asked: "I am just wondering if you are aware of the 'dirty tactics' the Lib Dems are using with election figures. I feel they are using the last set of figures unfairly because it reads as it they are fact for the forthcoming election, and the 'bars' are not portrayed in proportion properly."
Nothing new there, you might think - the LibDems have a long history of only being elected on the back of tactical votes rather than what they really stand for (if you can work out what they really stand for) and doing so on the back of the dodgy use of bar charts and statistics. They are the staple of a LibDem leaflet - in Tory areas then "Labour can't win here" and in Labour ones then "only the LibDems can beat Labour", normally irrespective of what the results are. Where they can't "prove" this using the last election results, they could use the council results, or the number of council seats, or the change in seats, or a parish council by-election held years ago or maybe the European result for whole region?
The most worrying thing is that the resident believe her neighbours may react to this misleading information not by voting LibDem but: "I am concerned people will be misled by this into not bothering to vote."
I think this is something the LibDem candidate will no doubt be questioned on this during the campaign.
Nothing new there, you might think - the LibDems have a long history of only being elected on the back of tactical votes rather than what they really stand for (if you can work out what they really stand for) and doing so on the back of the dodgy use of bar charts and statistics. They are the staple of a LibDem leaflet - in Tory areas then "Labour can't win here" and in Labour ones then "only the LibDems can beat Labour", normally irrespective of what the results are. Where they can't "prove" this using the last election results, they could use the council results, or the number of council seats, or the change in seats, or a parish council by-election held years ago or maybe the European result for whole region?
The most worrying thing is that the resident believe her neighbours may react to this misleading information not by voting LibDem but: "I am concerned people will be misled by this into not bothering to vote."
I think this is something the LibDem candidate will no doubt be questioned on this during the campaign.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Nick Clegg vs. the Norwich LibDems over who is more arrogant
We're all used to the hypocrisy of the LibDems, but even this takes the biscuit; just as they are claiming to be a joined-up party!
As part of an interview with the BBC (more here) Nick Clegg came out with this line:
Asked who he might support in the event of a hung Parliament, Mr Clegg said it was "arrogant" to second guess voters.
Apparently it is, according to Mr Clegg, arrogant to assume who people will vote for. So how does he square that with the usual utterings of his local parties:
Conservatives out of the race ... its so close here ... our next MP will be LibDem Simon Wright or Labour's man Charles Clarke - no other result is possible
How arrogant does that make the Norwich LibDems? To tell local people that no other result is possible other than the choice the LibDems give them. Aren't they second-guessing the voters in a big way?
Nick Clegg may like to use that line to get out of a hole with regards to which way they would jump in a hung parliament, but when his candidates up and down the country are being as arrogant as to assume they know the way people will vote means either they are in direct conflict. So that leaves us with 2 scenarios:
Either Clegg is ignored by his local parties; or they know what they are doing and are trying to decieve the electorate. I'll let you decide.
Hat-tip to regular contributor EGL Resident for this one!
As part of an interview with the BBC (more here) Nick Clegg came out with this line:
Asked who he might support in the event of a hung Parliament, Mr Clegg said it was "arrogant" to second guess voters.
Apparently it is, according to Mr Clegg, arrogant to assume who people will vote for. So how does he square that with the usual utterings of his local parties:
Conservatives out of the race ... its so close here ... our next MP will be LibDem Simon Wright or Labour's man Charles Clarke - no other result is possible
How arrogant does that make the Norwich LibDems? To tell local people that no other result is possible other than the choice the LibDems give them. Aren't they second-guessing the voters in a big way?
Nick Clegg may like to use that line to get out of a hole with regards to which way they would jump in a hung parliament, but when his candidates up and down the country are being as arrogant as to assume they know the way people will vote means either they are in direct conflict. So that leaves us with 2 scenarios:
Either Clegg is ignored by his local parties; or they know what they are doing and are trying to decieve the electorate. I'll let you decide.
Hat-tip to regular contributor EGL Resident for this one!
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Bar Chart Insanity (again)
Please do click and see this classic - here - from the LibDems in the Glenrothes by-election. The party has been going down the plughole recently and coming 4th in Glasgow East, behind the Tories, has really stung the party. Although they are not likely to do so badly this time they have a very uninspiring choice of candidate.
So back to the bar chart - "In Fife it's a two horse race for Westminster" it proclaims with the LibDems and Labour jostling for the top. So clearly their candidate Harry Wills must be a good bet to beat Labour.
But, hang on ... just check the last election result. Labour 52%, SNP 24% and then the LibDems on 13%. So a poor third place then - so whats with the bar chart? Oh look, there in the small print - the result of the 2006 Dunfirmlin by-election. So small you have to squint on screen to see it. So they are using a two year old by-election in another constituency to convince people they are ahead in Glenrothes?
Deliberately trying to decieve? Click and see for yourselfy but no wonder more and more people don't believe their bar charts or their party.
So back to the bar chart - "In Fife it's a two horse race for Westminster" it proclaims with the LibDems and Labour jostling for the top. So clearly their candidate Harry Wills must be a good bet to beat Labour.
But, hang on ... just check the last election result. Labour 52%, SNP 24% and then the LibDems on 13%. So a poor third place then - so whats with the bar chart? Oh look, there in the small print - the result of the 2006 Dunfirmlin by-election. So small you have to squint on screen to see it. So they are using a two year old by-election in another constituency to convince people they are ahead in Glenrothes?
Deliberately trying to decieve? Click and see for yourselfy but no wonder more and more people don't believe their bar charts or their party.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)