So far, apart from those activists in civil society who oppose the government and will vote for pretty much any “radical opposition” candidate, most people I’ve spoken to fall into two camps. The first is people who say they will vote for Sarkisian because they don’t see an alternative and want continuity, and the second consists of people who are confused. They don’t want to vote for Sarkisian, but they also don’t want to vote for Ter Petrosian. In that camp, some say they will vote for Vahan Hovannisian, some say they will vote for Sarkisian to stop Ter Petrosian, and others say they will vote for the first president because they hate Sarkisian.

However, the general feeling is that most people aren’t sure, but that Sarkisian has the strongest support among those that are. As the polls seem to back up what I’m picking up from people ranging from students to professionals, I have to take them at face value and certainly, until the U.S. Embassy or Gallup casts doubts on their reliability, I have no reason to doubt them. Besides, I think a clearer picture of the situation will emerge during the official pre-election campaign due to kick off next month.

Then many things can change as you might expect from elections in any country, but that could also favor other candidates rather than Ter Petrosian and Sarkisian. Hopefully, the electorate will make an informed choice among the various campaign manifestos presented to them and not on mud-slinging and mutual hatreds or personal ambitions. A lot will also depend on where candidates such as Raffi Hovannisian stand.

Anyway, Social Science in the Caucasus points its readers towards what information is necessary in order to ascertain whether an opinion poll can be taken seriously or not. However, it concludes, the dispute over the accuracy of such polls can only serve to further polarize society rather than act in, shall we say, the interest of democracy.

1. Reveal the sampling methodology. How, in other words, do the pollsters ensure that interviewing a few thousand people is representative of the entire electorate? Choosing respondents requires a) knowing where most people live, and b) having a very strong theory about which people are likely to turn out to vote on election day. This is very difficult stuff, and even tiny errors here can have tremendous consequences.

2. Tell us about the field work. Were the interviews done face to face or by telephone? When and how? Did the survey enumerators explain who they were working for, and is it possible that the respondents knew that they were looking certain answers?

3. Publish the questionnaire. What exactly was asked, and how, and in what sequence?

4. Document the non-response rate. How many people refused to answer? There are plenty of people who don’t pick up the phone, or who don’t have 30 minutes to talk to pollsters…and in this country, many of those people will vote.

5. Allow peer-review. Power point presentations for nonspecialists are fine, but make the data set available to peers for professional scrutiny (and of course you can restrict usage). If you really are confident in what you’re doing, this is the way to go.

The full post is here.

RAFFI HOVHANNISIAN’S RATING 22 PERCENT

AZG Armenian Daily
25/12/2007

“Jarangutyun” (Heritage) party office informs that according to “Gallup” statistics Raffi Hovhannisian’s rating is 22 percent in spite of the fact that he is not nominated as a candidate of presidency.

The statement mainly says that 12 percent of the questioned first of all mentioned Raffi Hovhannissian as a preferable candidate. His rating even increased as compared of the index of November. To this 12 percent
they add also 10 percent of the people that are ready to vote for Raffi Hovhannissian in case of their candidates’ impossible participation.

“Jarangutyun” party mentions that on the whole Raffi Hovhannisian’s and his party’s rating has increased recently.