HKU POP releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack

Press Release on May 12, 2015

Special Announcements

The “HKU POP Site” (http://hkupop.pori.hk) run by the Public Opinion Programme (POP) of The University of Hong Kong continues to release the results of the “Joint-University Rolling Survey on 2017 Chief Executive Election Proposal” on a daily basis except weekends and holidays. According to the latest findings, for the survey conducted from May 4 to 8, 43% “supported” the government’s proposal on CE election of 2017, 40% “opposed” and 17% did not give a definite answer. For details please refer to the feature page at http://hkupop.pori.hk/english/features/jointUrollingSurvey. Please note that the data released to public has a time lag of four days. Moreover, due to sampling errors, when quoting the figures, journalists should refrain from reporting the decimal places of the percentage figures.
To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, POP has already released for public examination some time ago via POP Site the raw data of all 71 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 72nd CE rating survey of CY Leung. Please follow normal academic standards when using or citing such data.

Abstract

POP interviewed 1,003 Hong Kong people between 4 to 7 May, 2015 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey conducted in early May shows that the popularity of CE CY Leung recedes again. His net popularity drops significantly by 7 percentage points to negative 37 percentage points, while his support rating goes down to 43.2 marks and stays below the warning line of 45. As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Carrie Lam is 57.4 marks, her approval rate 54%, disapproval rate 17%, giving a net popularity of positive 37 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS John Tsang is 58.2 marks, approval rate 49%, disapproval rate 13%, thus a net popularity of positive 36 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 50.1 marks, approval rate 35%, disapproval rate 22%, giving a net popularity of positive 13 percentage points. In terms of popularity rating, 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 7 among the 12 Directors have gone up, while 5 have gone down. Among them, only Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok, Secretary for Education Eddie Ng and Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man register significant changes in their net approval rates, up by 13 and 7 percentage points and down by 9 percentages points respectively. Among all the Directors, only Eddie Ng and Paul Chan register negative popularities, at negative 26 and 33 percentage points respectively. Ko Wing-man continues to be the most popular Director in spite of his popularity drop, his net approval rate now stands at positive 66 percentage points. According to POP’s standard, Ko Wing-man falls under the category of “ideal” performer, Carrie Lam falls under the category of “successful” performer. The performance of John Tsang, Matthew Cheung, Lai Tung-kwok, Ceajer Chan, Anthony Cheung, Wong Kam-sing, Rimsky Yuen, Gregory So, Tsang Tak-sing, Raymond Tam and Eddie Ng can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Paul Tang can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. CY Leung and Paul Chan fall into the category of “depressing” performer, while no one falls into that of “disastrous”. The maximum sampling error of all approval and disapproval rates is +/-4 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 66%. 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 1,003 successful interviews, not 1,003 x 66.2% 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 +/-2.3, 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]
4-7/5/2015	1,003	66.2%	+/-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	11-16/2/15	2-5/3/15	16-19/3/15	31/3-9/4/15	20-26/4/15	4-7/5/15	Latest change
Sample base	1,008	1,000	1,010	1,018	1,070	1,003	--
Overall response rate	67.6%	67.2%	69.1%	68.4%	67.0%	66.2%	--
Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding and error ^[8]	--
Rating of CE CY Leung	40.7	39.6	41.9^[9]	43.3	44.5	43.2+/-1.8	-1.3
Vote of confidence in CE CY Leung	22%	22%	21%	26%^[9]	26%	21+/-3%	-5%^[9]
Vote of no confidence in CE CY Leung	64%	64%	59%^[9]	58%	56%	58+/-3%	+2%
Net approval rate	-42%	-42%	-39%	-33%^[9]	-30%	-37+/-5%	-7%^[9]

[8] 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.
[9] 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	30/1-4/2/15	25/2/15^[10]	2-5/3/15	31/3-9/4/15	4-7/5/15	Latest change
Sample base^[10]	571-632	610	633-720	664-689	556-589	--
Overall response rate	67.5%	67.4%	67.2%	68.4%	66.2%	--
Latest finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error^[11]	--
Rating of CS Carrie Lam	54.2	--	54.0	56.2^[12]	57.4+/-2.3	+1.2
Vote of confidence in CS Carrie Lam	48%	--	46%	49%	54+/-4%	+5%^[12]
Vote of no confidence in CS Carrie Lam	23%	--	21%	15%^[12]	17+/-3%	+2%
Net approval rate	25%	--	26%	34%^[12]	37+/-6%	+3%
Rating of FS John Tsang	58.6^[12]	61.0^[12]	59.0^[12]	60.2	58.2+/-1.7	-2.0^[12]
Vote of confidence in FS John Tsang	55%	58%	57%	59%	49+/-4%	-10%^[12]
Vote of no confidence in FS John Tsang	13%	14%	12%	12%	13+/-3%	+1%
Net approval rate	42%	44%	45%	47%	36+/-6%	-11%^[12]
Rating of SJ Rimsky Yuen	46.4	--	45.1	48.1^[12]	50.1+/-2.3	+2.0
Vote of confidence in SJ Rimsky Yuen	32%	--	28%^[12]	30%	35+/-4%	+5%^[12]
Vote of no confidence in SJ Rimsky Yuen	29%	--	32%	26%^[12]	22+/-3%	-4%^[12]
Net approval rate	3%	--	-4%^[12]	4%^[12]	13+/-6%	+9%^[12]

[10] 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.
[11] 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 +/-2.3, 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.
[12] 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	2-5/3/15		31/3-9/4/15		4-7/5/15		Latest change
Sample base ^[13]	561-611		588-631		582-625		--
Overall response rate	67.2%		68.4%		66.2%		--
Sample base for each question/ Percentage of answer	Base	%	Base	%	Base	% & error ^[14]	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man	597	77%^[15]	629	80%	617	74+/-4%	-6%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man	597	5%	629	5%	617	8+/-2%	+3%^[15]
Net approval rate	--	72%^[15]	--	75%	--	66+/-5%	-9%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan	596	38%	620	41%	602	41+/-4%	--
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan	596	9%^[15]	620	6%^[15]	602	10+/-3%	+4%^[15]
Net approval rate	--	29%	--	34%	--	30+/-5%	-4%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung	561	43%	605	46%	625	45+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung	561	18%	605	15%	625	18+/-3%	+3%
Net approval rate	--	25%	--	31%	--	27+/-6%	-4%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok	589	37%^[15]	595	34%	613	42+/-4%	+8%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok	589	31%^[15]	595	31%	613	25+/-4%	-6%^[15]
Net approval rate	--	5% ^[15] ^[16]	--	4%	--	17+/-7%	+13%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung	588	39%	616	39%	601	39+/-4%	--
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung	588	21%	616	20%	601	23+/-3%	+3%
Net approval rate	--	18%	--	19%	--	16+/-6%^[17]	-3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang	581	22%^[15]	588	23%	609	26+/-4%	+3%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang	581	11%	588	11%	609	11+/-3%	--
Net approval rate	--	12%	--	13%	--	16+/-5%^[17]	+3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing	569	31%	631	33%	612	35+/-4%	+2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing	569	21%	631	21%	612	23+/-3%	+2%
Net approval rate	--	11%	--	11%	--	12+/-6%	+1%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing	602	30%	595	31%	602	30+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing	602	25%	595	24%	602	21+/-3%	-3%
Net approval rate	--	5%^[16]	--	7%	--	9+/-6%	+2%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So	610	31%	625	31%	601	32+/-4%	+1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So	610	28%	625	24%^[15]	601	25+/-4%	+1%
Net approval rate	--	3%	--	8%	--	7+/-6%	-1%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam	595	30%	630	29%	605	30+/-4%	+1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam	595	31%	630	26%^[15]	605	24+/-4%	-2%
Net approval rate	--	-1%	--	3%	--	5+/-6%	+2%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Eddie Ng	611	17%	622	15%	616	19+/-3%	+4%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Eddie Ng	611	49%	622	48%	616	45+/-4%	-3%
Net approval rate	--	-33%	--	-33%	--	-26+/-6%	+7%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Paul Chan	573	21%	604	17%^[15]	582	19+/-3%	+2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Paul Chan	573	48%	604	51%	582	52+/-4%	+1%
Net approval rate	--	-27%	--	-34%^[15]	--	-33+/-6%	+1%

[13] Starting from 2006, these questions only uses sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned, the sample size for each question also varies.
[14] 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.
[15] 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.
[16] Based on the figures in early March survey, in one decimal place, the respective net approval rates of Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok and Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing are 5.4 and 5.1 percentage points. Thus, they ranked seventh and eighth at that time.
[17] Based on the figures of latest survey, in one decimal place, the respective net approval rates of Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung and Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang are 16.1 and 15.7 percentage points. Thus, they are ranked fifth and sixth this time.

The latest survey showed that, CE CY Leung scored 43.2 marks, and 21% supported him as CE, his net approval rate is negative 37 percentage points. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Carrie Lam, FS John Tsang and SJ Rimsky Yuen were 57.4, 58.2 and 50.1 marks, and 54%, 49% and 35% would vote for their reappointment correspondingly. Their net approval rates are positive 37, positive 36 and positive 13 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 66 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 30 and 27 percentage points respectively. Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok, Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung, Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing, 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 Education Eddie Ng and Secretary for Development Paul Chan ranked 4th to 12th, their corresponding net approval rates are positive 17, positive 16, positive 16, positive 12, positive 9, positive 7, positive 5, negative 26 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 31 March to 9 April, 2015 while this survey was conducted from 4 to 7 May, 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.

5/5/15	Police arrests 5 more suspects involved in the Sai Kung abduction case.
3/5/15	Media continues to report on Hong Kong political reform.
2/5/15	Tourist number decreases on first day of Labour Day holiday.
29/4/15	Police launch manhunt operation for an abduction case in Sai Kung.
24/4/15	HKTV wins judicial review over free TV license.
22/4/15	Government announces the proposal for selecting the Chief Executive in 2017.
16/4/15	Commerce and Economic Development Bureau launches “HAPPY@hongkong Super JETSO 2015”.
11/4/15	Multiple-entry permits are changed to allow only one trip per week.
8/4/15	Hong Kong stock market turnover reaches all-time high.
3/4/15	25th anniversary of the promulgation of the Basic Law is coming up.
1/4/15	The Executive Council decides not to renew ATV's free-to-air broadcasting license.

Commentary

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

Our latest survey conducted in early May shows that the popularity of CE CY Leung recedes again. His net popularity drops significantly by 7 percentage points to negative 37 percentage points, while his support rating goes down to 43.2 marks and stays below the warning line of 45.

As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Carrie Lam is 57.4 marks, her approval rate 54%, disapproval rate 17%, giving a net popularity of positive 37 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS John Tsang is 58.2 marks, approval rate 49%, disapproval rate 13%, thus a net popularity of positive 36 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 50.1 marks, approval rate 35%, disapproval rate 22%, giving a net popularity of positive 13 percentage points. In terms of popularity rating, 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 7 among the 12 Directors have gone up, while 5 have gone down. Among them, only Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok, Secretary for Education Eddie Ng and Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man register significant changes in their net approval rates, up by 13 and 7 percentage points and down by 9 percentages points respectively. Among all the Directors, only Eddie Ng and Paul Chan register negative popularities, at negative 26 and 33 percentage points respectively. Ko Wing-man continues to be the most popular Director in spite of his popularity drop, his net approval rate now stands at positive 66 percentage points.

According to POP’s standard, Ko Wing-man falls under the category of “ideal” performer, Carrie Lam falls under the category of “successful” performer. The performance of John Tsang, Matthew Cheung, Lai Tung-kwok, Ceajer Chan, Anthony Cheung, Wong Kam-sing, Rimsky Yuen, Gregory So, Tsang Tak-sing, Raymond Tam and Eddie Ng can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Paul Tang can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. CY Leung and Paul Chan fall 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 (74%)

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

CS Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (54%)

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

FS John Tsang Chun-wah (49%); Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (45%); Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok (42%); Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan Ka-keung (41%); Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung Bing-leung (39%); Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing (35%)^[18]; SJ Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung (35%)^[18]; Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So Kam-leung (32%); Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing (30%)^[19]; Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam Chi-yuen (30%)^[19]; Secretary for Education Eddie Ng Hak-kim (19%)

“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 the Civil Service Paul Tang Kwok-wai (26%, 37%)

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

CE Leung Chun-ying (58%); Secretary for Development Paul Chan Mo-po (52%)

“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 SJ Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung are 35.1% and 34.9%.
[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 29.9%.

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)

May 19, 2015 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: People’s most familiar political figures