I think table 4 is the closest to measuring the response to that question:
Harris Interactive | The Harris Poll - Many European Adults Believe that the European Union Should Not Take in New Members
TABLE 4 TOTAL ALLOWING TURKEY INTO EU WITH REFORMS Total for allowing Turkey into the EU (combining yes responses from Tables 2 and 3) Base: All EU adults in five countries and US adults Great Britain France Italy Spain Germany United States % % % % % % Yes 40 34 53 53 51 50 No 33 54 37 27 38 5 Not Sure 28 12 10 20 11 45 Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding
TABLE 4
TOTAL ALLOWING TURKEY INTO EU WITH REFORMS
Total for allowing Turkey into the EU (combining yes responses from Tables 2 and 3)
Base: All EU adults in five countries and US adults
Great Britain
France
Italy
Spain
Germany
United States
%
Yes
40
34
53
51
50
No
33
54
37
27
38
5
Not Sure
28
12
10
20
11
45
Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding
I think it would have been more interesting if instead of asking USA:ians they had polled EU:ians outside of the big five. But it being FT I guess that would be far to much to hope for. A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
In the poll site you will find Tables 2 and 3. We have:
Question 2: "Do you think that Turkey should be invited to join the EU?" Question 3: "If Turkey were to implement reforms desired by some EU member states, should it be invited to join the EU?"
From here they derive table 4: "Total for allowing Turkey into the EU (combining yes responses from Tables 2 and 3)".
NOW LOOK at above of table 3: "Base: Adults who were not sure * OR DID NOT THINK * Turkey should be invited to join the EU"
instead of
"Base: Adults who were not sure Turkey should be invited to join the EU".
which is correct. but then, had they do so, and you would obtain, for example, 29.51% (before rounding), not 40%, in the upper leftmost square.
Fo'ks, doesn't that recalls you a nice 2004 joke on Diebold's voting machines from hell?
Good video though. A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
For Table 3, with the example of Britain, the base is the 46% who answered No to "Do you think that Turkey should be invited to join the EU?" PLUS the 31% that wasn't sure, altogether 77%. Now, 21% x 77% = 16.17%, I guess with the fractional percents it is a bit more, giving the 40% total. *Traitor*, n. A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.
Plus, do you criticise even asking people who answered the general question on Turkey's accession with a No? On that criticism, I have to disagree: the question of Table 2 does NOT distinguish people who would not let Turkey in as it is right now, but are open to the accession of a further reformed Turkey; and people who would not let it in under any circumstances and don't want accession talks either. *Traitor*, n. A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.
let me put in another perspective. how many those of said "yes" were assuming that turkish society would change?
the lack of discrimination is valid both ways!
...
notice that the not clarifications of the amount of requireds reform is not questioned, and that itself is sufficient to generate a bias. because what may be enough for N. may not enough for M. this omission is not innocent. it is a forged agreement.
No, I don't.
OK. I think where we could agree is that the unqualified question about whether Turkey should be allowed to join the EU is a stupid question. Personally, I think more specific questions should have been asked of everyone (such as: "Allow Turkey to accede if it fulfills all conditions?" "allow to accede once there is deeper integration?" "Do you think Turkey is able to fulfill all conditions... in 5 years, 10 years, 20 years?"). *Traitor*, n. A benighted individual who perceives an illusory distinction between serving his nation and abetting the criminals who govern it.
ONE - which part of the respondents to question 2 (T2Q) should answer to the question of table 3 (T3Q)?
TWO - which question or questions should substitute T2Q? ...........................
there is a connection between the two points, and I think that if we address question II first we may still agree on question I. so in this post i'll address question II; in a next, parallel, post i'll address question I. post titles codify this.
PUD-TWO will be discussed bellow .............................
It seems many different reasons can justify why one opposes or is in favour of Turkey becoming a member of the EU. we have:
Factors extrinsic to Turkey, such as
- is the EU ready to take new members? (>> is it mature, in terms of decision processes? >> are the new members states already integrated, and so we can continue enlargement under?) ) - can the EU take any more members at all? (>> may there be a limit number of members-states before the decision process colapse? OR >> may there be a limit number of member-states after which the founding members cannot obtain the advantages from participating in the association that justifies their financial support to the cohesion of the group?)
- factors specific to the entrance of Turkey ( >> the fact that Turkey is mostly in Asia (96% of its territory >> is Turkey a European culture? >> is Turkey too big and poor? >> was it not Turkey a country which kept SE Europe under its control for hundreads of years? >> is the geopolitical agenda of Turkey compatible to the one of major european powers?)
(Resuming) PUD-TWO Main Result: These are too many questions. they deserve a serious poll on their own.
Corolary a you cannot possible discuss the turkish accession problem in detail in this poll. Corolary b therefore the poll should be limitted to T2Q. T2Q is not a bad question. you just cannot elaborate from it.
In table 4 fnQ2 is mixed with all of of Q2. therefore the mixture in T4 (no question here) is enriched in fnQ2 and depleted in aQ2.
-------------------------
was this answering style too pompous for you?
You add to that, that french was an alternative language for many and that the modern turkish is embedded with hundred of french words (though the spelling isn't similar)! "What can I do, What can I write, Against the fall of Night". A.E. Housman
Note that the strongly pro-European Modem is also against Turkish membership on the grounds that it would be detrimental to deepening of the existing union. In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
