I first met that guy 40 years ago at a small meeting. I could not believe what a stupid dropkick he was. I didn't see how he could last in the game he was that thick it shows how much I know.Stuff
www.stuff.co.nz
Divisive prick.
Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics
- Thread starter wizard of Tauranga
- Start date
NZWarriors.com
John Nick
Contributor
I have asked the question before on this forum if anyone has ever been asked to poll.
Never had a yes.
Never answered one myself but, before the last election, Shay did one over the phone.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
They only poll people with landlines. I have a landline number on my cellphone but nobody asks me
I am sure that is why the polls in Merka are so screwed. They only ask old white people, that is the Trumper base.
Bay39er
Contributor
Taxpayers’ Union – Curia Poll was conducted from Thursday 31 August to Wednesday 06 September 2023. The median response was collected on Monday 04 September 2023. The sample size was 1,000 eligible New Zealand voters: 800 by phone and 200 by online panel. The sample selection for the phone panel is from those who are contactable on a landline or mobile phone selected at random from 15,000 nationwide phone numbers. The results are weighted to reflect the overall voting adult population in terms of gender, age, and area. Based on this sample of 1,000 respondents, the maximum sampling error (for a result of 50%) is +/- 3.1%, at the 95% confidence level. Results for sub-groups such as age and area will have a much higher margin of error and not seen as precise.
This is for you
Bruce
Both landline and mobile phones are used
This is for you
Bruce Both landline and mobile phones are used
- Thread starter
- #246
How low will labour go?
Been saying for a while this is the worst government we have had in my living memory. And as a fan of the Clarke government this is not Labour bashing, this is based on results…. or lack of them.
And tomorrow the Pre-election Economic Fiscal Update comes out and it’s going to show things are even worse than forecast for the government. Economic mismanagement coming home to roost.
Been saying for a while this is the worst government we have had in my living memory. And as a fan of the Clarke government this is not Labour bashing, this is based on results…. or lack of them.
And tomorrow the Pre-election Economic Fiscal Update comes out and it’s going to show things are even worse than forecast for the government. Economic mismanagement coming home to roost.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
I should have said I was going on what I hear from Merka...but I have checked and that say the landlines only is a myth...but why do they get it so wrong?Taxpayers’ Union – Curia Poll was conducted from Thursday 31 August to Wednesday 06 September 2023. The median response was collected on Monday 04 September 2023. The sample size was 1,000 eligible New Zealand voters: 800 by phone and 200 by online panel. The sample selection for the phone panel is from those who are contactable on a landline or mobile phone selected at random from 15,000 nationwide phone numbers. The results are weighted to reflect the overall voting adult population in terms of gender, age, and area. Based on this sample of 1,000 respondents, the maximum sampling error (for a result of 50%) is +/- 3.1%, at the 95% confidence level. Results for sub-groups such as age and area will have a much higher margin of error and not seen as precise.
This is for you
Both landline and mobile phones are used
- Thread starter
- #248
They only have 15,000 phone numbers to chose from and then only the ones that answer?
It’s probably the same 1,000 unemployed people every poll!
Bay39er
Contributor
It is probable that they start with a new cohort of 15000 every time
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
- Thread starter
- #250
Possibly but why even say about the 15,000? Why not just ring from all available numbers till you get the 1,000?
Most of mine go to my answering service
...the polls are becoming less and less reliable except for one thing.Doing the polls properly is very expensive. News organizations have shrinking budgets.
Donald Trump knew way before the last election he was behind. I mean months before...not weeks.
I don't think the general polls were showing that.
He had millions to pay for proper polls, and they don't release those at all.
As for the Dems they may well know the true results, and they won't tell anybody because they want their voters to get out and vote.
I haven't had political polling call. Had other surveys when I was younger.
The best one I had my flatmate thinking it was for her. So I delayed the caller and had my flatmate wanting to grab the phone. Timed it just right to say "yeah she's right here". Got the death stare once she realised.
The call up ones sound like a comedy show. They had to explain on the radio some of the weird picks for preferred Prime Minister as John Key who has retired from politics was still polling. On paper you have clear choices listed on the phone you can list whoever you like. If they call me I'll nominate Bruce.
I worked for a market research company. After years experiencing what happened I don't fit much into their plus or minus numbers. People coding loafs of bread for $14 (way before the current inflation).
Our company called my work mate at his desk. You would think the company numbers would be removed to not promote bias. It's like when your young and you had to do a survery or sell raffle tickets and would only ask your friends and familyHe told them he's in the same building and bugger off. Said he got told off.
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Worried2Death
Contributor
I don't think some people actually understand how MMP works. Woke up overnight and couldn't get back to sleep so I got up to do some work. Started listening to Talkback and this older lady came on saying that since neally 60% of the country don't want National to be in government, all the rest of the parties in parliament should be asked to form the next government. Firstly, the host said, that would require something that would never happen.... ACT working with the Greens and the Maori Party. Secondly, that would mean the Government would be led by a party which nearly 75% of the country had voted against.
Bless the old dear, but she couldn't see what the issue was. In her mind, MMP meant that the party with the largest number of votes should form the next government by itself or the rest of the parties need to form it.
Last edited:
Chippy is going to be on TV3's AM show this morning and they've already said that they will be asking him about last night's NewsHub poll.
Why bother? We already know what the answers will be:
A. Our internal polling shows it will be much closer than these other polls are showing. Which, of course, can't be proven or disproven as the parties never release their internal polling. If he is asked the next obvious question, does your internal polling show that you will be able to form the next Government, Chippy will avoid answering the question by saying the results of their polling is confidential, but it shows the result will be closer than the other polls say.
B. The only poll that matters is Election Day.
I know the politicians all receive media training on how to avoid answering questions (i.e. Luxon's performance on Sunday) but it's annoying how much contempt for the public (whose votes they need) this pack of losers from all parties' show!!!
Why bother? We already know what the answers will be:
A. Our internal polling shows it will be much closer than these other polls are showing. Which, of course, can't be proven or disproven as the parties never release their internal polling. If he is asked the next obvious question, does your internal polling show that you will be able to form the next Government, Chippy will avoid answering the question by saying the results of their polling is confidential, but it shows the result will be closer than the other polls say.
B. The only poll that matters is Election Day.
I know the politicians all receive media training on how to avoid answering questions (i.e. Luxon's performance on Sunday) but it's annoying how much contempt for the public (whose votes they need) this pack of losers from all parties' show!!!
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
- Thread starter
- #256
C - our electioneering only officially started last week and I had been focused on my role as PM. There’s still a long way to go to election time…
Now let's watch ACT's support plummet when people considering voting for them realise that ACT are starting to look like an unstable party....
And another election next year if, by Budget 2024, there’s no agreement on government spending.
This is the hypothetical possibility in the confidence-only governing arrangement that Act leader David Seymour is floating if the numbers fall National and Act’s way, but National is unwilling to shift the dial far enough.
There’s a lot that National and Act agree on, such as the law and order space, but there are also substantial differences when it comes to government spending and tax.
So might it transpire that National comes to implement its tax package in Budget 2024 and Act refuses to support it, leading to a new election?
Getting way ahead of ourselves.
What Seymour is clear about is that he won’t stop Christopher Luxon from becoming Prime Minister, and, in an ideal world, they would agree on a coalition platform.
“The strong preference is that you actually nut out the outline of what’s going to happen for the next three years in a coalition agreement - and then you keep your word,” Seymour told the Herald.
But if post-election negotiations break down, Act could decide to pledge support for Luxon as Prime Minister but nothing more.
“At the extreme, you might end up with each Budget and each extra initiative requiring a negotiation. Now, that would be painful for everybody. We just make the point that we’re prepared to do it if absolutely required,” Seymour said.
“My sense is that they’re always going to come back to the table. But it’s about getting the best deal.
“If you’ve committed to vote for every Budget unconditionally, then you’ve really given up the chance to be influential, to make sure that the change of government is more than just a change in personnel.”
Act could offer confidence-only and theoretically still be at the Cabinet table, but Seymour said it would probably mean a National minority government.
Minority governments are fairly common in Canada, he added.
“It’s not an unusual thing. This is not wild or radical. We’re just being more transparent about the relationship that we’d like to have on the one hand, and are prepared to have if necessary on the other.”
It could also mean a potential impasse come Budget 2024, says Otago University legal expert Professor Andrew Geddis.
“What Act seems to be saying is, ‘Look, if in that period of negotiation after the election we can’t get what we want, then we’ll let National get in and start governing. And we will carry on negotiating fiscal matters until 2024, when the Budget has to happen. If we reach an agreement by then, great, government can carry on. But if we haven’t, well, we pull the pin’.”
Geddis said not supporting a minority government on supply is essentially a vote of no-confidence in the government.
“At that point, it seems hard to see how you’d have anything but a new election,” he said.
“It’s a very high-risk strategy. It may work. But if it goes wrong and National, in essence, calls their bluff, then they’re faced with either having to back down and looking a bit silly, or alternatively actually taking the country back to the polls.”
Labour will certainly not be unhappy with Seymour’s comments, with leader Chris Hipkins portraying them as a recipe for instability.
But another election would be extremely unlikely.
It would mean the National and Act relationship was so irreconcilable that they’d be prepared to go back to the polls, where they’d be severely punished for failing to put together a workable government.
So some pre-election posturing, then?
Luxon seemed to hint at this by dismissing questions about Seymour’s confidence-only arrangement.
“I just don’t think that’s going to be a reality at all,” Luxon said.
”David Seymour and I have a good personal relationship. We’re going to have a very constructive relationship in government.”
Luxon side-stepped questions about whether Seymour was bluffing, and dismissed talk about a National minority government as hypothetical.
On that latter point he agreed with Seymour, who said: “All of this is ridiculously hypothetical because no one’s even voted yet.”
www.nzherald.co.nz
‘Confidence-only’: An Act bluff or a real prospect of a policy-by-policy minority government?
A policy-by-policy government, with each issue only progressing if there’s a parliamentary majority.And another election next year if, by Budget 2024, there’s no agreement on government spending.
This is the hypothetical possibility in the confidence-only governing arrangement that Act leader David Seymour is floating if the numbers fall National and Act’s way, but National is unwilling to shift the dial far enough.
There’s a lot that National and Act agree on, such as the law and order space, but there are also substantial differences when it comes to government spending and tax.
So might it transpire that National comes to implement its tax package in Budget 2024 and Act refuses to support it, leading to a new election?
Getting way ahead of ourselves.
What Seymour is clear about is that he won’t stop Christopher Luxon from becoming Prime Minister, and, in an ideal world, they would agree on a coalition platform.
“The strong preference is that you actually nut out the outline of what’s going to happen for the next three years in a coalition agreement - and then you keep your word,” Seymour told the Herald.
But if post-election negotiations break down, Act could decide to pledge support for Luxon as Prime Minister but nothing more.
“At the extreme, you might end up with each Budget and each extra initiative requiring a negotiation. Now, that would be painful for everybody. We just make the point that we’re prepared to do it if absolutely required,” Seymour said.
“My sense is that they’re always going to come back to the table. But it’s about getting the best deal.
“If you’ve committed to vote for every Budget unconditionally, then you’ve really given up the chance to be influential, to make sure that the change of government is more than just a change in personnel.”
Act could offer confidence-only and theoretically still be at the Cabinet table, but Seymour said it would probably mean a National minority government.
Minority governments are fairly common in Canada, he added.
“It’s not an unusual thing. This is not wild or radical. We’re just being more transparent about the relationship that we’d like to have on the one hand, and are prepared to have if necessary on the other.”
It could also mean a potential impasse come Budget 2024, says Otago University legal expert Professor Andrew Geddis.
“What Act seems to be saying is, ‘Look, if in that period of negotiation after the election we can’t get what we want, then we’ll let National get in and start governing. And we will carry on negotiating fiscal matters until 2024, when the Budget has to happen. If we reach an agreement by then, great, government can carry on. But if we haven’t, well, we pull the pin’.”
Geddis said not supporting a minority government on supply is essentially a vote of no-confidence in the government.
“At that point, it seems hard to see how you’d have anything but a new election,” he said.
“It’s a very high-risk strategy. It may work. But if it goes wrong and National, in essence, calls their bluff, then they’re faced with either having to back down and looking a bit silly, or alternatively actually taking the country back to the polls.”
Labour will certainly not be unhappy with Seymour’s comments, with leader Chris Hipkins portraying them as a recipe for instability.
But another election would be extremely unlikely.
It would mean the National and Act relationship was so irreconcilable that they’d be prepared to go back to the polls, where they’d be severely punished for failing to put together a workable government.
So some pre-election posturing, then?
Luxon seemed to hint at this by dismissing questions about Seymour’s confidence-only arrangement.
“I just don’t think that’s going to be a reality at all,” Luxon said.
”David Seymour and I have a good personal relationship. We’re going to have a very constructive relationship in government.”
Luxon side-stepped questions about whether Seymour was bluffing, and dismissed talk about a National minority government as hypothetical.
On that latter point he agreed with Seymour, who said: “All of this is ridiculously hypothetical because no one’s even voted yet.”
‘Confidence-only’: An Act bluff or a real prospect of a policy-by-policy minority government?
David Seymour has talked about offering support to Luxon only on confidence, not supply
I know he could say that but that also implies they've taken no notice of any poll before the closing of Parliament but political reporters are saying senior members of the Labour Party have been really concerned about the poll numbers from before Ardern stepped down.
And, if Labour were never interested about polling numbers outside of the election period, why did Little get replaced by Ardern because of the polling numbers?
It's all "weasel words" as the old man used to say..... but the 26% of people still willing to vote for Labour will be eating it all up waiting for the late surge to take them to victory.
Maybe Chippy could find out from Trump how to overturn an election result?
NZWarriors.com
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
- Thread starter
- #259
Weasel words from the media.
Read the two last paragraphs in the same article above.
Seymour is quoted as saying it’s all ‘ridiculously hypothetical’ (ie it’s not going to happen) yet they write an article to try to create fear in the reader
Sounds like more of that Labour misinformation campaign being carried on by the media.
