<?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: First post-Conway poll</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111</link>
	<description>Opinion polling and political analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:29:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Senior</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111/comment-page-2#comment-341469</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Senior</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 16:37:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111#comment-341469</guid>
		<description>OOOPPS Meant to post this on the Populus thread .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OOOPPS Meant to post this on the Populus thread .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Senior</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111/comment-page-2#comment-341468</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Senior</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 16:34:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111#comment-341468</guid>
		<description>The detailed data for this Populus poll is now on the website and it is a mystery why the LibDems are down in this poll compared to the January poll . The raw figures are actually slightly better in this latest poll as are the net changes with how people say they voted in 2005 . Net change to Con 12 voters compared to 11 in Jan , net gfain from Labour 13 voters compared to 10 in January . The strange change is with the weighting . The January raw LibDem figure was boosted by the weighting but this month that weighting has gone to Others instead .</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The detailed data for this Populus poll is now on the website and it is a mystery why the LibDems are down in this poll compared to the January poll . The raw figures are actually slightly better in this latest poll as are the net changes with how people say they voted in 2005 . Net change to Con 12 voters compared to 11 in Jan , net gfain from Labour 13 voters compared to 10 in January . The strange change is with the weighting . The January raw LibDem figure was boosted by the weighting but this month that weighting has gone to Others instead .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JohnH</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111/comment-page-2#comment-337965</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 23:55:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111#comment-337965</guid>
		<description>Ah well, Sally C and members of the Tory Brigade, enjoy your moment of relief with the latest poll - but don&#039;t count too much on it as a prediction of how things will look a year (or more) hence. 

We&#039;d better move to the next set of gloats, moans, hopes, fears - further up the screen :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah well, Sally C and members of the Tory Brigade, enjoy your moment of relief with the latest poll &#8211; but don&#8217;t count too much on it as a prediction of how things will look a year (or more) hence. </p>
<p>We&#8217;d better move to the next set of gloats, moans, hopes, fears &#8211; further up the screen <img src='http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sally C</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111/comment-page-2#comment-337866</link>
		<dc:creator>Sally C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 21:40:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111#comment-337866</guid>
		<description>Jamie - not sure the Hain affair has gone down worse? more the way Gordon handled it. 

There could still be something of a delayed response. Obviously, we said that about the last poll aswell. But we will see.

This has to be very worrying for Labour.
 
Mike Smithson on PB is taking it as proof of part one of his theory:
Part One - every time Cameron is in the news the Tories poll rating goes up [whether the news is good or bad].

Part Two - [a recent addition - since January] that every time Gordon is in the news personally, Labour go down.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jamie &#8211; not sure the Hain affair has gone down worse? more the way Gordon handled it. </p>
<p>There could still be something of a delayed response. Obviously, we said that about the last poll aswell. But we will see.</p>
<p>This has to be very worrying for Labour.</p>
<p>Mike Smithson on PB is taking it as proof of part one of his theory:<br />
Part One &#8211; every time Cameron is in the news the Tories poll rating goes up [whether the news is good or bad].</p>
<p>Part Two &#8211; [a recent addition - since January] that every time Gordon is in the news personally, Labour go down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sally C</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111/comment-page-2#comment-337856</link>
		<dc:creator>Sally C</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2008 21:31:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/1111#comment-337856</guid>
		<description>John H 
 You are in the clear - not moaning now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John H<br />
 You are in the clear &#8211; not moaning now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

