The Inclusive Government (IG) (issues of power-sharing vis-à-vis elections, the performance of the IG); Constitutional reform (the need for constitutional change, experiences of the COPAC process, the need for further constitutional education, performance of the main political parties in shaping inputs into the emerging constitution, expectations of the contents and directions of the new constitution, content and process); Violence and Intimidation (experiences of violence and intimidation – historically and in contemporary Zimbabwe, possible change in experiences of the level of violence); Elections (timing, expectations of future elections, the order of elections and constitutionmaking, violence and elections, things that would help people feel safe in time of elections, the relation between violence and the vote, voter registration and confidence in the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC)); Political interest and media use; and ‘The vote’ – and non-declaration of vote intent. The questionnaire was anchored in consultative interviews conducted in Zimbabwe in September 2010.1 Partner organisations were engaged on their needs for information – types of questions, for example, that would help inform their advocacy work in Zimbabwe. These consultations were conducted by Susan Booysen and Freedom House. Many of the questions in the survey directly emerged from these consultations. With a view to tracking political attitude change in Zimbabwe over time, the questionnaire retained a series of items that were used, for example, in the September 2009 FHSA-MPOI survey, then under the guidance of pollster Michael Bratton. The questionnaire went through a series of drafts. The inputs of a range of Freedom House persons, as well as those of MPOI, are acknowledged. The political volatility and associated dangers to both researcher-interviewers in the field, and the survey respondents, were continuous considerations in the drafting of the questionnaire. Based on reports by MPOI, it was considered at one stage to postpone fieldwork, when planning processes unfolded in October-November 2010. Several questions were deemed too dangerous to include in the survey. In the end, in most instances, it was decided to include crucial themes, even if they were deemed politically sensitive, but to exclude politically dangerous questions as judged by MPOI, that had the potential to trigger attacks on the interviewers. The rest of the methodology section draws on and summarises methodology inserts provided by MPOI. Sampling The Mass Public Opinion Institute (MPOI) was responsible for the sampling. MPOI cooperated with the Central Statistical Office (CSO) for population projections (Table 1). 1 Freedom House Southern Africa (FHSA), 14 September 2010, Report on Consultation with FHSA Partner Organisations in Zimbabwe, by Susan Booysen. 11