Fair interpretations for rebel surveys

We know that survey questions aren't innocent and can influence your responses. We know that after fieldwork comes what's called the kitchen, which is an essential step but, at the same time, fraught with possibilities for manipulation. And we know that, if all this proves insufficient, the data can still be further addressed in the packaging phase, detailing conclusions that are nowhere to be found in the hard numbers. This is the case with the recent survey by The reason The headline on the front page was "Partners suffer corruption in Catalonia and the Basque Country." After this formulation for the initiated, the newspaper goes on to say that if the results of ERC, Junts, and the PNV are falling, it's due to the wear and tear caused by the controversies swirling around the PSOE. But this analysis is, quite simply, an insult to intelligence. In the case of Catalonia, it turns out that the PSC is rising, which undermines the thesis. In fact, the text explains that the vote for Esquerra and the regional council members is going "towards more radical options," referring to the Catalan Alliance. Therefore, it's clear that the headline is inventing causes and effects, because the shift in votes is due (if true) to a dynamic that has nothing to do with corruption.

In the case of the Basque Country, the PNV barely lost one seat. But Bildu also gained one seat. Therefore, the likely shift is between these two parties, and again, PSOE corruption plays no part here. This loosely held link has only one rational explanation. On Sunday, there's a demonstration against the Socialists, and the slogan is that "mafia" is the driving force of the rally. Feijóo is desperately seeking his. Go away, Mr. Gonzalez!, but so far it only has four botched surveys with conclusions based on the same scientific basis as L'Oréal products: because I'm worth it.