Skip to main content

FM
Former Member
Bisram’s sample was manipulated
By STABROEK STAFF | LETTERS | WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 2011

Dear Editor,

Vishnu Bisram of NACTA fame claims he did a recent poll in early July 2011. Mr Bisram published some findings of those polls in two letters in Stabroek News titled ‘Poll finds 42% approval rating for government’ (SN, July 16) and ‘NACTA poll finds PPP in lead’ (SN, July 17). The second letter stated that the PPP had 46% support. These polls are statistical subterfuge. The problem starts in the formation of the sample. Bisram states, “The poll randomly interviewed 780 voters to yield a demographically representative sample (45% Indians, 30% Africans, 16% Mixed, 8% Amerindians, and 1% others) of the population.” That is not a demographically representative sample. The sample is based on race. So why does Mr Bisram have to interview people if he is simply selecting them based on race? You either appear African or Indian or Amerindian or Mixed Race or you don’t. I cannot see the need for an interview when the pollster is solely selecting on race. An interview process can taint the entire poll. Mr Bisram’s poll is inconsistent with the population’s statistical trend since 1980. The sample and resulting poll results are structured to give the PPP an advantage. It is to generate a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In 1991, which is just before the PPP returned to power, the ethnic percentages of the major ethnic groups out of the total population were as follows: Indians 48.63%, Africans 32.26%, Mixed Races 12.14% and Amerindians 6.46%. In the 2002 census, these percentages were as follows: Indians 43.45%, Africans 30.20%, Mixed Races 16.73% and Amerindians 9.16%. The truth is that between 1991 and 2002, the ethnic populations changed as follows with respect to the total population: Indians decreased by 5.18%, Africans decreased by 2.06% while Mixed Races increased by 4.33% and Amerindians increased by 2.7%. If we venture back to the 1980 census, the Indian population was 51.93%. Only two ethnic populations have grown in 20 years of census taking.

The Indian population has steadily declined since the 1980 census. It has not grown. It did not grow when the party it votes for overwhelmingly in the form of the PPP returned to power in a wave of euphoria. It actually fell. Is Mr Bisram saying that after the 2002 census when crime, cost of living and corruption under the PPP escalated to their highest levels under the wonderful watch of President Bharrat Jagdeo, that the Indian population grew in Guyana? Is Mr Bisram saying that a population that fled this land left, right and centre actually bucked and reversed the trend of the 1980, 1991 and 2002 censuses and actually grew? Yes, Mr Bisram is telling us this statistical Anansi story.

I am calling on Vishnu Bisram to prove his 45% Indian demographic representation in his sample. I am calling on Mr Bisram and NACTA to prove that the Amerindian population fell from 9.16% to 8% between 2002 and July 2011. I am calling on Mr Bisram and NACTA to prove that the Mixed Race population fell by 0.73% between 2002 and July 2011. Mr Bisram has reduced the Amerindian and Mixed Race populations in this tricky representative sample he masterminded. It is another act of statistical manipulation. For the Amerindian and Mixed Race populations do not overwhelmingly vote PPP. To reduce their representation in the sample at the expense of increasing the Indian representation is Machiavellian. A proper demographic representative sample using statistical evidence gleaned from censuses and statistical trending should put the PPP’s current support in July 2011 somewhere around 41% using Mr Bisram’s own results. It will put the current PPP government’s support in July 2011 at around 37% to 38% again, using Mr Bisram’s own numbers. The two-card trick games played by Mr Bisram and others is at its end. Let change and truth prevail.

Yours faithfully,
M Maxwell

Source

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:
Bisram’s sample was manipulated
By STABROEK STAFF | LETTERS | WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 2011

Dear Editor,

Vishnu Bisram of NACTA fame claims he did a recent poll in early July 2011. Mr Bisram published some findings of those polls in two letters in Stabroek News titled ‘Poll finds 42% approval rating for government’ (SN, July 16) and ‘NACTA poll finds PPP in lead’ (SN, July 17). The second letter stated that the PPP had 46% support. These polls are statistical subterfuge. The problem starts in the formation of the sample. Bisram states, “The poll randomly interviewed 780 voters to yield a demographically representative sample (45% Indians, 30% Africans, 16% Mixed, 8% Amerindians, and 1% others) of the population.” That is not a demographically representative sample. The sample is based on race. So why does Mr Bisram have to interview people if he is simply selecting them based on race? You either appear African or Indian or Amerindian or Mixed Race or you don’t. I cannot see the need for an interview when the pollster is solely selecting on race. An interview process can taint the entire poll. Mr Bisram’s poll is inconsistent with the population’s statistical trend since 1980. The sample and resulting poll results are structured to give the PPP an advantage. It is to generate a self-fulfilling prophecy.

In 1991, which is just before the PPP returned to power, the ethnic percentages of the major ethnic groups out of the total population were as follows: Indians 48.63%, Africans 32.26%, Mixed Races 12.14% and Amerindians 6.46%. In the 2002 census, these percentages were as follows: Indians 43.45%, Africans 30.20%, Mixed Races 16.73% and Amerindians 9.16%. The truth is that between 1991 and 2002, the ethnic populations changed as follows with respect to the total population: Indians decreased by 5.18%, Africans decreased by 2.06% while Mixed Races increased by 4.33% and Amerindians increased by 2.7%. If we venture back to the 1980 census, the Indian population was 51.93%. Only two ethnic populations have grown in 20 years of census taking.

The Indian population has steadily declined since the 1980 census. It has not grown. It did not grow when the party it votes for overwhelmingly in the form of the PPP returned to power in a wave of euphoria. It actually fell. Is Mr Bisram saying that after the 2002 census when crime, cost of living and corruption under the PPP escalated to their highest levels under the wonderful watch of President Bharrat Jagdeo, that the Indian population grew in Guyana? Is Mr Bisram saying that a population that fled this land left, right and centre actually bucked and reversed the trend of the 1980, 1991 and 2002 censuses and actually grew? Yes, Mr Bisram is telling us this statistical Anansi story.

I am calling on Vishnu Bisram to prove his 45% Indian demographic representation in his sample. I am calling on Mr Bisram and NACTA to prove that the Amerindian population fell from 9.16% to 8% between 2002 and July 2011. I am calling on Mr Bisram and NACTA to prove that the Mixed Race population fell by 0.73% between 2002 and July 2011. Mr Bisram has reduced the Amerindian and Mixed Race populations in this tricky representative sample he masterminded. It is another act of statistical manipulation. For the Amerindian and Mixed Race populations do not overwhelmingly vote PPP. To reduce their representation in the sample at the expense of increasing the Indian representation is Machiavellian. A proper demographic representative sample using statistical evidence gleaned from censuses and statistical trending should put the PPP’s current support in July 2011 somewhere around 41% using Mr Bisram’s own results. It will put the current PPP government’s support in July 2011 at around 37% to 38% again, using Mr Bisram’s own numbers. The two-card trick games played by Mr Bisram and others is at its end. Let change and truth prevail.

Yours faithfully,
M Maxwell

Source


Poll conducted on a car ride from Brooklyn to Queens, not in Guyana.

Bisram is a kwak.
FM
I cant believe that some one talks about votes in Guyana and thinks that race is irrelevant when the smallest kid knows that most Guyanese vote based on their racisl fears or racial loyalties. And have since 1957.

The Indian and African % of the voting age population is most likely higher than its share of the total population. So Bisram might well be correct when he estimates the Indian population at 45%, especially when past behavior suggests that they are most likely to vote.

If the mixed population grew significantly in the 1990s then clearly most of them are still too young to vote. So the mixed voting age population is less than its represantation at the census.

People like Maxwell need to tell us who exactly these mixed people are. And also needs to prove that they represent a distinct voting bloc and nor a residual group of diverse people of who dont want tio be called African, East Indian, or Amerindian.

If the growth of the mixed population results from increased miscegenation then to vote one would have needed to have been born prior to 1993. So most of the births between 1991 and 2002 are too young to vote. Therefore teh mixed population is much less than its share in the census. If this isnt the case than Maxwell needs to tell us why this population grew faster than otehr groups when its rate of migration should be at least as high as that of Africans.
FM
quote:

The Indian population has steadily declined since the 1980 census. It has not grown. It did not grow when the party it votes for overwhelmingly in the form of the PPP returned to power in a wave of euphoria. It actually fell.

M Maxwell
Bisram’s sample was manipulated
By STABROEK STAFF | LETTERS | WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 2011
Source


The real polls are the actual votes counted at the election.

With the Indian population declining since the 1980's and there are Indian supporters in other political parties, it follows simply that in 2006, the PPP/C secured a large number of supporters from the non-indian group.
FM
quote:
Originally posted by Demerara_Guy:
quote:

The Indian population has steadily declined since the 1980 census. It has not grown. It did not grow when the party it votes for overwhelmingly in the form of the PPP returned to power in a wave of euphoria. It actually fell.

M Maxwell
Bisram’s sample was manipulated
By STABROEK STAFF | LETTERS | WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 2011
Source


The real polls are the actual votes counted at the election.

With the Indian population declining since the 1980's and there are Indian supporters in other political parties, it follows simply that in 2006, the PPP/C secured a large number of supporters from the non-indian group.


The facts are that the PPP stole the seat from Linden won by the AFC. Those are the facts which are skewing the numbers.

FACT - Less people voted in 2006 than previously.

FACT - in 6 mths the AFC made significant gains with 5 seats plus the 1 stolen in linden by the PPP.

Ignoring them and or saying they will come out less stronger than in 2006 runs contrary to what is being seen on the ground.

Bisram pole is a joke.
J
quote:
Originally posted by jags:
quote:
Originally posted by Demerara_Guy:
quote:

The Indian population has steadily declined since the 1980 census. It has not grown. It did not grow when the party it votes for overwhelmingly in the form of the PPP returned to power in a wave of euphoria. It actually fell.

M Maxwell
Bisram’s sample was manipulated
By STABROEK STAFF | LETTERS | WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 2011
Source


The real polls are the actual votes counted at the election.

With the Indian population declining since the 1980's and there are Indian supporters in other political parties, it follows simply that in 2006, the PPP/C secured a large number of supporters from the non-indian group.


The facts are that the PPP stole the seat from Linden won by the AFC. Those are the facts which are skewing the numbers.

FACT - Less people voted in 2006 than previously.

FACT - in 6 mths the AFC made significant gains with 5 seats plus the 1 stolen in linden by the PPP.

Ignoring them and or saying they will come out less stronger than in 2006 runs contrary to what is being seen on the ground.

Bisram pole is a joke.


Bisram is an agent of the PPP
FM
Well whatever integrity bisram had or independence he claimed to possess was rudely erased as he paraded down 5th ave with His Excellency and Cde. Ramotar.

He will never regain any trust or credibility and will merely be seen as a servant of the PPP.
J
quote:
Originally posted by Alexander:
Bisram did not parade with anyone. He was in their company, and you can do the same.


Alexander I would looooooooooooove to but my tongue is not as long as Bisram and I do not love the taste of ass.
J
quote:
Originally posted by Dharry:
quote:
Originally posted by cain:
oH MY!


Next Bisram poll - ppp 65%, PNC - 25%, AFC - 10%.


Reality, AFC - 52%, PPP - 30%, APNU - 18%


It looks like PNC & Friends will get only 10%,
so PPP could end up with Just a few more votes.
Maybe 1 or 2 percent more.
Donald would be Joining the Congress Place Fellas in the opposition benches after elections.
FM
quote:
Originally posted by Alexander:
Bisram did not parade with anyone. He was in their company, and you can do the same.


You support corruption, nepotism and thieves. Now you support a kwak.
Mitwah
When I lived in Richmond Hill, I saw Bisram at all types of events in and out of the community.He writes articles for a newspaper, so he has to attend events to know what's happening in the community. He has to mingle with all. However this does not mean he supports the organizations or the individuals.

So because he was seen in the company of the president and other Guyanese does not mean he supports or does not support the government of Guyana.

I was once in a picture with Desmond Hoyte published in a newspaper and I definitel was not a supporter of Hoyte and the PNC.

Also, over the years, Bisram's polls have been quite accurate. He predicted the last elections in Guyana. While Dick Morris predicted an AFC victory. Who should we believe?
FM
quote:
Originally posted by marlon:
When I lived in Richmond Hill, I saw Bisram at all types of events in and out of the community.He writes articles for a newspaper, so he has to attend events to know what's happening in the community. He has to mingle with all. However this does not mean he supports the organizations or the individuals.

So because he was seen in the company of the president and other Guyanese does not mean he supports or does not support the government of Guyana.

I was once in a picture with Desmond Hoyte published in a newspaper and I definitel was not a supporter of Hoyte and the PNC.

Also, over the years, Bisram's polls have been quite accurate. He predicted the last elections in Guyana. While Dick Morris predicted an AFC victory. Who should we believe?

Good comment, Marlon.
B
quote:
Originally posted by Dharry:
quote:
Originally posted by cain:
oH MY!

Reality, AFC - 52%,


AFC @ 52% is as much a fantasy as the PPP at 65%.

They have neglecting region 4 where 40% of the voters live, and maybe over 50% of those not inclined to vote PPP. Yet the AFC focused almost entirely on region 6 where the folks tell them "they vex because AFC talk too bad about the PPP when they should only talk bad about jagdeo"
FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×