,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
John I’ve said repeatedly I would be happy to meet and discuss your methods and data. You have already said these disagree with mine. I have said both methods have limits, which seemingly you do not accept. I don’t see what purpose is served by aggressive assertions like this.
As regards my "not understanding how this is done", that is on you John. You have not provided an adequate explanation of your sampling methodology, just repeatedly asserted its allegedly infallible accuracy. There is no such thing as a perfect method. I am happy to discuss
strengths and weaknesses of any method but unsubstantiated chest-beating about a particular method and aggressive dismissal of another method is playground stuff which serves no purpose and is unbecoming of an MP.
So by all means, put into the public domain a detailed explanation of how you sample your voters, what the response rates are, what information you gather about them etc. Otherwise there's no productive discussion to have, and I'm not interested in a shouting match.
