The new TV polls
The TV1 and TV3 polls yesterday show roughly the same situation, which also mirrors Polity’s poll of polls. National retains a smallish polling lead over the left bloc of around four points. But Winston Peters and New Zealand First are starting their surge toward the 5% threshold. If they cross that threshold it would complicate the post-election picture enormously.
One added element to account for, though, is the increasing evidence of a modest mismatch between poll-based estimates of popularity and actual popularity in elections. Gavin White from UMR showed a few weeks ago that there are some important patterns of apparent bias in the polls. Specifically, the final polls before our MMP elections have tended, on average, to poll:
National: 2.4% too high
Labour: 0.5% too low
Greens: 1.5% too high
NZ First: 1.1% too low.
If we apply those possible biases to the latest Poll of Polls, we get a projected election result that looks something like this:
National: 45.4%
Labour: 32.1%
Greens: 10.3%
NZ First: 5.6%
Still a small bloc-level advantage to National, but close. And post-election it would be all down to Winston.
Filed under: polls
Commenting on this Blog entry will be automatically closed on April 4, 2014.
31 March, 2014 | 3 comments
“Growth passing us by” – New Zealanders
In your New Zealand Herald this morning:
Nearly three-quarters of New Zealanders believe the gap between rich and poor has increased under six years of National Government and almost two-thirds feel they are no better off or have gone backwards, a Herald-DigiPoll survey suggests.
Other polls have shown a majority of New Zealanders think the economy is getting better overall. But now this Digipoll shows a clear majority believing that the gains from that growth have passed them by.
That is not a good constellation of results for the government, and suggests it is vulnerable in September to an argument that says “the global economy is on the mend, but you have missed out because National is looking after its mates.”
In 1984, Ronald Reagan famously made his re-election mantra: “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?” In 2014, most New Zealanders are answering “no.”
UPDATE: Fixed early-morning typos. Apologies.
Commenting on this Blog entry will be automatically closed on April 4, 2014.
31 March, 2014 | 1 comment
The climate change do-nothings
On Q+A yesterday, ACT leader Jamie Whyte and PR-adviser-to-the-right Matthew Hooton rolled out their brand new “climate change, meh” argument.
Even they have finally figured out that “the science isn’t clear” is a dog. When over 9,000 studies say that human-caused climate change is real, and the very few people saying “no” include charlatans like Lord Monckton, the science is crystal clear.
The new reason to do nothing about climate change is, apparently, that the international community is never going to get its act together anyway, so what’s the point? Here’s Whyte:
I can predict with almost complete certainty how other people will behave [ie. they’ll do nothing], and I’m not going to impose a cost on myself as an empty moral gesture.
Fatalism, much?
Not content with being defeatist, Whyte and Hooton are also breathtakingly ignorant about the international community’s ability to meet a large challenge. Here are two quick examples where the entire world saw a challenge, acted, and succeeded:
When the world learned the science about how CFCs were depleting the Ozone layer, it acted. In 1989, an agreement to phase out CFCs entered into force, having been signed by every member of the UN. Within 10 years, global production of CFCs dropped by over 90%.
In 1997, the international community launched the Chemical Weapons Convention, aiming to rid the world of these abhorrent devices. 190 countries signed it. To date, over 80% of the world’s chemical weapons stocks have been confirmed destroyed.
There are plenty more global successes across trade policy (eg. WTO), war (eg. Geneva Conventions), the environment (eg. UNCLOS), and more.
So when Matthew Hooton says…
We know for an absolute certainty there will be no diplomatic breakthrough [on climate change], so therefore we should begin preparing for the temperature rise.
…I politely suggest that he doesn’t have the faintest bloody clue what he’s talking about.1
I sure am glad ACT and Hooton have finally stopped pretending to be scientists. It is time they stop pretending to be diplomats, too.