[ad_1]
There are two different episodes, but they brought with them a similar risk: Ana Gomes’ imported vaccine and Marcelo’s delay in going ahead with the reapplication to Belém threatened to contaminate the campaigns of those who are, until now – and despite the enormous distance that separates them at the polls -, the best positioned candidates for the Presidency of the Republicin the January 24 elections. In the Observer / TVI / Pythagorean survey, respondents reveal contrasting opinions, censuring the attitude of the former MEP and praising Marcelo’s management.
One case at a time. First, Ana Gomes. a cheepin early December, he would eventually become one of the Most striking episodes of the ex-ambassador’s pre-campaign. “Tired of waiting” to be called to get a flu shot, wrote Ana Gomes, decided to take a dose that had been given “Brought by a friend from France”. OR Send, which denounced the stocks of large quantities of vaccines by “certain companies”, still challenged the Health authorities: “How is @DGSaude?”
Tired of waiting for availability at the pharmacy where I signed up in September, a friend from France just gave me a flu shot. The worst thing of all was hearing from pharmaceutical companies that there are vaccines, but reserved for certain people from certain companies, who bought them. How is it, @DGSaude?
– Ana Gomes (@AnaMartinsGomes) December 1, 2020
Followers did not let the episode go blank. “Illegal”, “wedge”, “withdraw from the campaign”, “beautiful plan”. The most diverse formulations were commented, almost all censor the decision of Ana Gomes to avoid a shortage of doses of the seasonal flu vaccine.
In the Observer / TVI / Pythagorean survey, 46% of those surveyed believe that the former Socialist MEP deserves to be “censored” for the episode. Another 28% say the case does not deserve censure or praise. Finally, there is a group that defends Ana Gomes. 20%, a fifth of those surveyed, are those who defend the socialist.
Ana Gomes received the flu vaccine that a friend from France brought her. Act is prohibited by Infarmed
In an analysis by party (who says they voted for a certain political force in the 2019 legislatures), it is the electorate of the CDS who most defends the praise of the socialist. Women, respondents over 54 years of age and from the most disadvantaged social strata also reinforce this (minority) barrier against criticism.
On the contrary, the men who responded to the survey penalized the attitude more, as did the group of respondents between 35 and 44 years old. In social stratification, the upper classes are most evident in this critique.
Another case, another outcome. It was on December 7 that Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa confirmed that he would be re-elected the Presidency of the Republic. “Because I am not going to leave in the middle of a demanding and painful hike, nor am I going to escape my responsibilities, I am not going to trade what we all know will be the adversities and unpopularities of tomorrow for the personal and family comfort of today. Because just as I have fulfilled a duty of conscience for five years ”. This was how it was justified, in that improvised space that he chose for the advertisement, in a bakery in Belém.
Re-election of Marcelo. The country needs “an independent president who does not worry”
At that moment, all your the opponents were on the ground, not only collecting signatures to formalize the respective requests, but also in meetings, debates, some interviews, in short, in a kind of very early pre-campaign. Marcelo continued, throughout this stage, as president. That is, benefited from this stage that was available to any other candidate and hidden in those functions so as not to come into contact with future opponents.
Taking into account all this context, how do the respondents assess this “delay” in Marcelo’s decision to step forward?
Quite anchored in his electorate -the Social Democratic electorate-, the President of the Republic sees that the management that made the announcement of re-election is “Commended” by 39% of respondents. Above all, it is women, participants over 54 years of age, residents of the south of the country and from the lower middle class who, in addition to PSD voters, contribute the most to this assessment.
On the other side are 22% of respondents who censor openly the management of this process by Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa. And there are male voters, younger (18-34 years), higher social classes and residents in the Porto area.
There is another group with relevant weight, but that is committed to a neutral position: 34% do not censor or praise the president of the Republic.
Data sheet
For 6 weeks (December 10, 2020 to January 21, 2020), TVI and the Observer will publish a poll each week with a minimum sample of 626 interviews. Each week the sample will correspond to 2 subsamples of 313 interviews. One of the subsamples will be collected in the week of publication and the other in the week prior to publication. Each subsample will be representative of the Portuguese electoral universe (not probabilistic) according to the criteria of gender, age and region.
Publication Week 1: The fieldwork was carried out between December 10 and 13. A total sample of 629 interviews was collected which, for a confidence level of 95.5%, corresponds to a maximum margin of error of ± 4.0%. The selection of the respondents was made through the random generation of “mobile phone” numbers, maintaining the proportion of the 3 main operators identified by the ANACOM report, whenever necessary, fixed numbers are randomly selected to support compliance with the plan Of sampling. Interviews are collected through telephone interviews (CATI – Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing).
The study aims to evaluate the opinion of Portuguese voters on issues related to the elections, namely the main protagonists, the moments of the campaign, as well as the intention to vote in the different parties. The response rate was 55.32%. The technical direction of the study is in charge of Rita Marques da Silva.
The abstention rate for the survey is 56.6%, which corresponds to those interviewed who initially refused to answer the interview because they did not intend to vote in this election.
The complete technical file as well as all the results were made available to the Regulatory Body of Social Communication, which will make them available for online consultation in due course.
[ad_2]
