Dear Editor,
One of the strange things about Guyana’s politics is that people tend to see things in black and white. Thus if one is a PPP supporter, then one sees no wrong emanating from that entity. And if one is anti-
PPP, then one sees nothing good coming out of that movement.
Mr Daljeet seems averse to accepting any poll findings that turn out to be positive for the PPP. I know, however, that he realizes that one cannot debunk the findings of a poll by mere ‘sayso,’ especially if the track record of the pollster places him as being usually on the ball. Given Bisram’s level of accuracy, I’m rather surprised that Mr Daljeet concludes that because the pollster refuses to disclose information outside of the purview of the direct poll results/analyses, that the “analyses and poll conclusions will continue to be deemed compromised and counter-productive.” Since such a non-sequitur does not fit into any known paradigm, perhaps Mr Daljeet can walk readers through the logic he used to arrive at such a conclusion. And since a poll measures a popula-tion’s behaviour at a certain point in time, how does one categorize a poll as productive or counter productive? And for whom is a poll productive or counter productive?
In any case, Mr Daljeet can easily prove the pollster wrong by commissioning his own poll using pollsters that fit the parameters provided by him in his letter (SN, August 26). After all, personal biases and mere speculation do not form any kind of basis to deem a poll compromised. Please note, however, that a certain Dick Morris had conducted a poll that was lauded by a columnist (one wonders whether Morris was asked to disclose the kind of information that is being demanded of Bisram, especially given that Morris was unknown to most Guyanese). Of course, the poll became a national joke when its findings were proven to be absolutely out of sync with the elections that followed, and which the poll had sought to determine. So, in choosing their pollster Mr Daljeet and other critics must ensure that the individual has a track record of accuracy that, at the minimum, matches Bisram’s.
In any case, in the United States umpteen polls are done on a daily basis and, contrary to what Mr Daljeet proclaims, the results of those polls are usually not accompanied by the barrage of information that he is seeking from Bisram. Yet the average America never sees those results as “compromised and counter productive.”
Incidentally, the poll questions asked by Bisram were appended onto the tables that were published. Also it might be instructive for Mr Daljeet, to find out from Stabroek News just what information was offered to them by Bisram. The answers might surprise and enlighten him. Also The Caribbean Voice has published many of Bisram’s poll results over the years. Additionally, we have been/are privy to the questions asked, the statistical information, margin of error and sundry other information. I also know where Bisram lives, his phone number, his place of work, his qualifications, his history of community involvement and charitable work, names and addresses of members of NACTA and their qualifications, etc. As a journalist, I firmly adhere to the principle of confidentiality. Mr Daljeet is free to make what he wants of this.
Finally, Editor, anyone who understands voter psyche in Guyana would know that Bisram’s latest poll makes sense. It is only when voter psyche undergoes a metamorphosis that issues and logic would supersede ethnic and party loyalty in informing voter choices and behaviour.
Yours faithfully,
Annan Boodram
