HKU POP releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack

Press Release on February 10, 2015

Special Announcement

To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, Public Opinion Programme (POP) at The University of Hong Kong has already released for public examination some time ago via the “HKU POP Site” (http://hkupop.pori.hk) the raw data of all 67 regular rating surveys of CE CY Leung, as well as the 181 regular rating surveys of former CE Donald Tsang and 239 regular rating surveys of former CE CH Tung, along with related demographics of respondents. POP today releases the raw data of the latest which is the 68th CE rating survey of CY Leung. Please follow normal academic standards when using or citing such data.

Abstract

POP interviewed 1,000 Hong Kong people between 2 to 5 March, 2015 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey conducted in early March shows while CE CY Leung’s approval and disapproval rates have remained unchanged since mid-February, staying at a net popularity of negative 42 percentage points, his support rating has dropped below 40 marks again to 39.6 marks, which is a new low since October 2014. As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Carrie Lam is 54.0 marks, her approval rate 46%, disapproval rate 21%, giving a net popularity of positive 26 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS John Tsang is 59.0 marks, approval rate 57%, disapproval rate 12%, and net popularity positive 45 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 45.1 marks, approval rate 28%, disapproval rate 32%, giving a net popularity of negative 4 percentage points. The support rating of Carrie Lam and net popularity of Rimsky Yuen are at all-time record lows since they became CS and SJ respectively. John Tsang continues to be the most popular Secretary of Department. As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the net approval rates of 5 among the 12 Directors have gone up, while 5 have gone down and 2 remain unchanged. Among them, only Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok and Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man register significant changes in their net approval rates, up by 10 percentage points and down by 6 percentages points respectively. Among all the Directors, Raymond Tam, Paul Chan and Eddie Ng register negative popularities, at negative 1, 27 and 33 percentage points respectively. Ko Wing-man continues to be the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 72 percentage points. According to POP’s standard, Ko Wing-man falls under the category of “ideal” performer, John Tsang falls under the category of “successful” performer. The performance of Carrie Lam, Matthew Cheung, Anthony Cheung, Lai Tung-kwok, Wong Kam-sing, Gregory So, Tsang Tak-sing, Raymond Tam, Rimsky Yuen, Paul Chan and Eddie Ng can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Ceajer Chan and Paul Tang can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. CY Leung falls into the category of “depressing” performer, while no one falls into that of “disastrous”. The maximum sampling errors of all approval and disapproval rates is +/-3 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling errors of rating figures and net approval rates need another calculation. The response rate of the survey is 67%. As the support rating of CE CY Leung continues to stand below the warning line of 45 again, Director of POP, Robert Chung, again reprints the abstracts of two articles written by him before on CE popularity, to discuss the possibility of a governance crisis. The articles can be downloaded in full from the POP Site.

Points to note:

[1] The address of the “HKU POP SITE” is http://hkupop.pori.hk, journalists can check out the details of the survey there.
[2] The sample size of this survey is 1,000 successful interviews, not 1,000 x 67.2% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. When quoting these figures, journalists can state “sampling error of rating not more than +/-2.1, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, and sampling error of net values not more than +/-7% at 95% confidence level”.
[4] Because of sampling errors in conducting the survey(s) and the rounding procedures in processing the data, the figures cannot be too precise, and the totals may not be completely accurate. Therefore, when quoting percentages of the survey(s), journalists should refrain from reporting decimal places, but when quoting the rating figures, one decimal place can be used.
[5] The data of this survey is collected by means of random telephone interviews conducted by real interviewers, not by any interactive voice system (IVS). If a research organization uses “computerized random telephone survey” to camouflage its IVS operation, it should be considered unprofessional.

Latest Figures

POP today releases the latest popularity figures of CE CY Leung and various Secretaries of Departments and Directors of Bureaux under the accountability system. From 2014, POP enhanced the previous simple weighting method based on age and gender distribution to “rim weighting” based on age, gender and education (highest level attended) distribution. The latest figures released today have been rim-weighted according to provisional figures obtained from the Census and Statistics Department regarding the gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population in 2014 year-end and the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution collected in the 2011 Census. Herewith the contact information for the latest survey:

Date of survey	Overall sample size	Response rate	Maximum sampling error of percentages^[6]
2-5/3/2015	1,000	67.2%	+/-3%

[6] Errors are calculated at 95% confidence level using full sample size. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Questions using only sub-samples would have bigger sampling error. Sampling errors of ratings and net approval rates are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected.

As different questions involve different sub-samples, the sampling errors will vary accordingly. The table below briefly shows the relationship between sample size and maximum sampling errors for the readers to capture the corresponding changes:

Sample size (total sample or sub-sample)	Sampling error of percentages^[7] (maximum values)	Sample size (total sample or sub-sample)	Sampling error of percentages^[7] (maximum values)
Sample size (total sample or sub-sample)	Sampling error of percentages^[7] (maximum values)	Sample size (total sample or sub-sample)	Sampling error of percentages^[7] (maximum values)
1,300	+/- 2.8 %	1,350	+/- 2.7 %
1,200	+/- 2.9 %	1,250	+/- 2.8 %
1,100	+/- 3.0 %	1,150	+/- 3.0 %
1,000	+/- 3.2 %	1,050	+/- 3.1 %
900	+/- 3.3 %	950	+/- 3.2 %
800	+/- 3.5 %	850	+/- 3.4 %
700	+/- 3.8 %	750	+/- 3.7 %
600	+/- 4.1 %	650	+/- 3.9 %
500	+/- 4.5 %	550	+/- 4.3 %
400	+/- 5.0 %	450	+/- 4.7 %

[7] Based on 95% confidence interval.

Recent popularity figures of CE CY Leung are summarized as follows:

Date of survey	2-8/1/15	15/1/15^[8]	19-21/1/15	30/1-4/2/15	11-16/2/15	2-5/3/15	Latest change
Sample base	1,021	640	1,024	1,028	1,008	1,000	--
Overall response rate	65.5%	67.4%	65.2%	67.5%	67.6%	67.2%	--
Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding and error ^[9]	--
Rating of CE CY Leung	40.6^[10]	44.8^[10]	42.1^[10]	40.9	40.7	39.6+/-1.8	-1.1
Vote of confidence in CE CY Leung	23%	25%	24%	24%	22%	22+/-3%	--
Vote of no confidence in CE CY Leung	62%	60%	58%	62%^[10]	64%	64+/-3%	--
Net approval rate	-39%^[10]	-35%	-34%	-38%	-42%	-42+/-5%	--

[8] This survey was the instant survey after the Policy Address and only asked rating of CE as well as his vote of confidence. Its sample size was 640.
[9] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of rating not more than +/-1.8, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-3%, sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-5% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[10] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.

Recent popularity figures of the three Secretaries of Departments under the accountability system are summarized below:

Date of survey	8-11/12/14	2-8/1/15	30/1-4/2/15	25/2/15^[11]	2-5/3/15	Latest change
Sample base^[11]	553-613	619-655	571-632	610	633-720	--
Overall response rate	64.5%	65.5%	67.5%	67.4%	67.2%	--
Latest finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error ^[12]	--
Rating of CS Carrie Lam	54.8	54.8	54.2	--	54.0+/-2.1	-0.2
Vote of confidence in CS Carrie Lam	50%^[13]	47%	48%	--	46+/-4%	-2%
Vote of no confidence in CS Carrie Lam	21%^[13]	20%	23%	--	21+/-3%	-2%
Net approval rate	30%^[13]	27%	25%	--	26+/-6%	+1%
Rating of FS John Tsang	55.9	56.1	58.6^[13]	61.0^[13]	59.0+/-1.6	-2.0^[13]
Vote of confidence in FS John Tsang	57%	54%	55%	58%	57+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in FS John Tsang	12%	13%	13%	14%	12+/-3%	-2%
Net approval rate	44%	41%	42%	44%	45+/-5%	+1%
Rating of SJ Rimsky Yuen	47.3	45.8	46.4	--	45.1+/-2.0	-1.3
Vote of confidence in SJ Rimsky Yuen	32%	32%	32%	--	28+/-3%	-4%^[13]
Vote of no confidence in SJ Rimsky Yuen	25%	30%^[13]	29%	--	32+/-3%	+3%
Net approval rate	7%^[13]	2%	3%	--	-4+/-6%	-7%^[13]

[11] The frequency of this series of questions is different from that of CE popularity ratings. Comparisons, if made, should be synchronized using the same intervals. Starting from 2011, these questions only uses sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned, the sample size for each question also varies. The survey conducted on 25/2/2015 was the instant survey after the Budget Speech and only asked rating of FS as well as his vote of confidence.
[12] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of various ratings not more than +/-2.1, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-6% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[13] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.

Latest popularity figures of Directors of Bureaux under the accountability system are summarized below, in descending order of net approval rates:

Date of survey	2-8/1/15		30/1-4/2/15		2-5/3/15		Latest change
Sample base ^[14]	566-626		562-643		561-611		--
Overall response rate	65.5%		67.5%		67.2%		--
Sample base for each question/ Percentage of answer	Base	%	Base	%	Base	% & error ^[15]	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man	610	78%	593	82%^[16]	597	77+/-3%	-5%^[16]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man	610	6%	593	3%^[16]	597	5+/-2%	+2%
Net approval rate	--	72%	--	78%^[16]	--	72+/-4%	-6%^[16]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan	577	40%	595	40%	596	38+/-4%	-2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan	577	11%	595	13%	596	9+/-2%	-4%^[16]
Net approval rate	--	29%	--	28%	--	29+/-5%	+1%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung	626	50%	571	46%	561	43+/-4%	-3%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung	626	18%	571	17%	561	18+/-3%	+1%
Net approval rate	--	32%	--	29%	--	25+/-6%	-4%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung	569	43%^[16]	610	40%	588	39+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung	569	20%	610	22%	588	21+/-3%	-1%
Net approval rate	--	23%	--	18%	--	18+/-6%	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang	572	26%	590	26%	581	22+/-3%	-4%^[16]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang	572	11%	590	10%	581	11+/-3%	+1%
Net approval rate	--	16%	--	16%	--	12+/-5%	-4%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing	618	32%	616	33%	569	31+/-4%	-2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing	618	23%	616	24%	569	21+/-3%	-3%
Net approval rate	--	10%	--	9%	--	11+/-6%	+2%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok	619	37%	562	32%^[16]	589	37+/-4%	+5%^[16]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok	619	36%	562	37%	589	31+/-4%	-6%^[16]
Net approval rate	--	0%	--	-5%	--	5+/-7%^[17]	+10%^[16]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing	613	27%	629	31%	602	30+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing	613	30%^[16]	629	26%	602	25+/-4%	-1%
Net approval rate	--	-2%^[16]	--	5%^[16]	--	5+/-6%^[17]	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So	604	31%	643	31%	610	31+/-4%	--
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So	604	27%	643	27%	610	28+/-4%	+1%
Net approval rate	--	4%	--	4%	--	3+/-6%	-1%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam	597	33%	579	27%^[16]	595	30+/-4%	+3%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam	597	25%	579	30%^[16]	595	31+/-4%	+1%
Net approval rate	--	8%	--	-3%^[16]	--	-1+/-6%	+2%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Paul Chan	566	16%	630	18%	573	21+/-3%	+3%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Paul Chan	566	54%	630	49%^[16]	573	48+/-4%	-1%
Net approval rate	--	-38%	--	-31%^[16]	--	-27+/-7%	+4%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Eddie Ng	573	18%	601	20%	611	17+/-3%	-3%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Eddie Ng	573	51%^[16]	601	50%	611	49+/-4%	-1%
Net approval rate	--	-33%	--	-30%	--	-33+/-6%	-3%

[14] Starting from 2006, these questions only uses sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned, the sample size for each question also varies.
[15] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4% and sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-7% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[16] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.
[17] Based on the figures of latest survey, in two decimal places, the respective net approval rates of Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok and Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing are 5.38 and 5.06 percentage points. Thus, they are ranked seventh and eighth this time.

The latest survey showed that, CE CY Leung scored 39.6 marks, and 22% supported him as CE, his net approval rate is negative 42 percentage points. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Carrie Lam, FS John Tsang and SJ Rimsky Yuen were 54.0, 59.0 and 45.1 marks, and 46%, 57% and 28% would vote for their reappointment correspondingly. Their net approval rates are positive 26, positive 45 and negative 4 percentage points respectively.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, according to the net approval rates, results revealed that the top position goes to Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man, attaining positive 72 percentage points. The 2nd and 3rd places belong to Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan and Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung with net approval rates of positive 29 and 25 percentage points respectively. Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung, Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing, Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam, Secretary for Development Paul Chan and Secretary for Education Eddie Ng and ranked 4th to 12th, their corresponding net approval rates are positive 18, positive 12, positive 11, positive 5, positive 5, positive 3, negative 1, negative 27 and negative 33 percentage points. In other words, only Ko Wing-man scored net approval rate of over 50% among all Directors of Bureaux.

Opinion Daily

In January 2007, POP opened a feature page called “Opinion Daily” at the “POP Site”, to record significant events and selected polling figures on a day-to-day basis, in order to let readers judge by themselves the reasons for the ups and downs of different opinion figures. In July 2007, POP collaborated with Wisers Information Limited whereby Wisers supplies to POP each day starting from July 24, a record of significant events of that day, according to the research method designed by POP. These daily entries would be uploaded to “Opinion Daily” as soon as they are verified by POP.

For the polling items covered in this press release, the previous survey of some items was conducted from 30 January to 4 February, 2015 while this survey was conducted from 2 to 5 March, 2015. During this period, herewith the significant events selected from counting newspaper headlines and commentaries on a daily basis and covered by at least 25% of the local newspaper articles. Readers can make their own judgment if these significant events have any impacts to different polling figures.

4/3/15	Zhang Dejiang expresses his opinions at a meeting with Hong Kong and Macao members of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference.
1/3/15	Protest against parallel traders in Yuen Long.
27/2/15	Hong Kong Monetary Authority implements three measures on residential market.
25/2/15	Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah releases the 2015-2016 Budget.
24/2/15	Leung Chun-ying proposes to tighten the Individual Visit Scheme.
20/2/15	Lau Wong-fat draws a fortune stick for Hong Kong at the Che Kung Temple.
19/2/15	Media continues to report on parallel traders.
16/2/15	Both captains in the Lamma ferry disaster are sentenced to jail.
15/2/15	Netizens protest against parallel traders in Shatin.
14/2/15	Funding request for the Innovation and Technology Bureau is not passed.
14/2/15	Both captains in the Lamma ferry disaster are found guilty.
10/2/15	Court finds former employer guilty of abusing Indonesian domestic helper.

Commentary

Note: The following commentary was written by Director of POP, Robert Chung.

Our latest survey conducted in early March shows while CE CY Leung’s approval and disapproval rates have remained unchanged since mid-February, staying at a net popularity of negative 42 percentage points, his support rating has dropped below 40 marks again to 39.6 marks, which is a new low since October 2014.

As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Carrie Lam is 54.0 marks, her approval rate 46%, disapproval rate 21%, giving a net popularity of positive 26 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS John Tsang is 59.0 marks, approval rate 57%, disapproval rate 12%, and net popularity positive 45 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 45.1 marks, approval rate 28%, disapproval rate 32%, giving a net popularity of negative 4 percentage points. The support rating of Carrie Lam and net popularity of Rimsky Yuen are at all-time record lows since they became CS and SJ respectively. John Tsang continues to be the most popular Secretary of Department.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the net approval rates of 5 among the 12 Directors have gone up, while 5 have gone down and 2 remain unchanged. Among them, only Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok and Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man register significant changes in their net approval rates, up by 10 percentage points and down by 6 percentages points respectively. Among all the Directors, Raymond Tam, Paul Chan and Eddie Ng register negative popularities, at negative 1, 27 and 33 percentage points respectively. Ko Wing-man continues to be the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 72 percentage points.

According to POP’s standard, Ko Wing-man falls under the category of “ideal” performer, John Tsang falls under the category of “successful” performer. The performance of Carrie Lam, Matthew Cheung, Anthony Cheung, Lai Tung-kwok, Wong Kam-sing, Gregory So, Tsang Tak-sing, Raymond Tam, Rimsky Yuen, Paul Chan and Eddie Ng can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Ceajer Chan and Paul Tang can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. CY Leung falls into the category of “depressing” performer, while no one falls into that of “disastrous”.

The following table summarizes the grading of CE and the principal officials for readers' easy reference:

“Ideal”: those with approval rates of over 66%; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets

Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man (77%)

“Successful”: those with approval rates of over 50%; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets

FS John Tsang Chun-wah (57%)

“Mediocre”: those not belonging to other 5 types; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets

CS Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (46%); Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (43%); Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung Bing-leung (39%); Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok (37%); Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing (31%)^[18]; Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So Kam-leung (31%)^[18]; Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing (30%)^[19]; Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam Chi-yuen (30%)^[19]; SJ Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung (28%); Secretary for Development Paul Chan Mo-po (21%); Secretary for Education Eddie Ng Hak-kim (17%)

“Inconspicuous”: those with recognition rates of less than 50%; ranked by their approval rates; the first figure inside bracket is approval rate while the second figure is recognition rate

Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan Ka-keung (38%, 47%); Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang Kwok-wai (22%, 33%)

“Depressing”: those with disapproval rates of over 50%; ranked by their disapproval rates shown inside brackets

CE Leung Chun-ying (64%)

“Disastrous”: those with disapproval rates of over 66%; ranked by their disapproval rates shown inside brackets

[18] In one decimal place, the respective approval rates of Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing and Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So Kam-leung are 31.4% and 30.9%.
[19] In one decimal place, the respective approval rates of Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing and Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam Chi-yuen are 30.4% and 29.8%.

Since the support rating of CE CY Leung continues to stand below the warning line of 45 again, I reprint again the abstracts of two articles written by me before on CE popularity for public reference, to discuss the possibility of a governance crisis. The articles can be downloaded in full from the POP Site.

“The Popularity of Tung Chee-hwa from All Angles” (released on 14/5/2003): “According to our experience, a political figure with less than 50 marks can be said to have fallen into negative popularity, while a score of less than 45 marks can indicate credibility crisis. Using this analysis, Tung has been negatively popular among the general public since August 2002, and in March 2003, he has sunk into a credibility crisis…”

“New Perspectives on Chief Executive Ratings” (released on 12/6/2003): “Concurrent tests showed that a support rating of 55 marks was more or less equivalent to a ‘vote share’ of 45%, 50 marks could be converted to round about 30%, 45 marks to 20%, and 40 marks to 10% to 15%... In late 1990, after the ‘approval rate’ of Margaret Thatcher sank to 25%, she withdrew from the election for the leader of the British Conservative Party, thereby gave up her job as the Prime Minister of UK, a post which she held since 1979. In early 1997, John Major lost his post of Prime Minister to Tony Blair, after his ‘approval rate’ hovered around the level of 30% for a long time. As for former USA President Bill Clinton, his lowest ever ‘approval rate’ within his 8-year terms of office was as high as 37%...”

Future Release (Tentative)

March 17, 2015 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Taiwan issues