https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.html
It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition
leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the
subsequent election.
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position
In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that
drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that
drives party policy popularity.
--
Crash McBash
It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition
leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the
subsequent election.
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position
In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that
drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that
drives party policy popularity.
--Crash I agree. I believe also that many people (including myself) get somewhat annoyed at the personality bashing that goes on prior to an election. And this election it seems to be worse - some of the MSM attacks on Luxon are so trivial as to be laughable. Here is an example https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/132148491/christopher-luxon-worries-its-hard-to-understand-mori-names-what-bubble-is-he-in.
Crash McBash
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.htmlI too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believe
It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition
leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the
subsequent election.
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position
In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that
drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that
drives party policy popularity.
On Fri, 26 May 2023 10:02:22 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.htmlI too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believe
It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition >>leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the
subsequent election.
that it really says anything about this year - in either direction.
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position
In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that >>drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that
drives party policy popularity.
The polls do seem to diverge a little more than normal - the latest
one had figures for the small parties - most around 1%, but in other
polls they have not always been there. Somehow a 48% total for ACT and National was turned into a certain prediction that the party vote for
the smaller parties would turn that into about 51% for Act/National; I
did not see any explanation for that, and could not be bothered trying
to work out the assumptions that led there.
My perception is that at this stage some of the media "personalities"
are trying to turn commentary to it being a close election - more
because that is nice for news stories than because the polls are
particularly decisive. So it is all a circus at present; with costs
being an obvious issue
low; my local wholesaler is restricting sales of frozen potato chips; effectively to ensure that commercial customers get priority -
potatoes and some other crops were badly hit by the cyclones, and may
not recover to at least a couple of years. Yet there is no mention of
that, the implication being that "something should be done" - the
government has enough with restoring infrastructure, which the
opposition claims is wasteful spending - without subsidising crops in
short supply because of the cyclone, or increased international
prices. The Opposition are walking around the issue, implying that
they would have managed the economy better, but how that supplies
potatoes does not get asked.
So apart from saying that the polls are inconclusive at this stage,
there is little value in the polls; and partisan websites such as
Kiwiblog are struggling to find anything really worth talking about .
. .
On 2023-05-26, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 26 May 2023 10:02:22 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.htmlI too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believe
It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition >>>leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the
subsequent election.
that it really says anything about this year - in either direction.
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position
In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that >>>drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that
drives party policy popularity.
The polls do seem to diverge a little more than normal - the latest
one had figures for the small parties - most around 1%, but in other
polls they have not always been there. Somehow a 48% total for ACT and
National was turned into a certain prediction that the party vote for
the smaller parties would turn that into about 51% for Act/National; I
did not see any explanation for that, and could not be bothered trying
to work out the assumptions that led there.
The assumptions are that x+y+z=51%. The talking point should be how can a >majority Goverment happen, as in which parties total 51%. To me this is what >one should focous on. At present we are going to the wire.
We may end up with a minority Government.
My perception is that at this stage some of the media "personalities"
are trying to turn commentary to it being a close election - more
because that is nice for news stories than because the polls are
particularly decisive. So it is all a circus at present; with costs
being an obvious issue
How about eggs?
- for example supplies of potatoes are clearly
low; my local wholesaler is restricting sales of frozen potato chips;
effectively to ensure that commercial customers get priority -
potatoes and some other crops were badly hit by the cyclones, and may
not recover to at least a couple of years. Yet there is no mention of
that, the implication being that "something should be done" - the
government has enough with restoring infrastructure, which the
opposition claims is wasteful spending - without subsidising crops in
short supply because of the cyclone, or increased international
prices. The Opposition are walking around the issue, implying that
they would have managed the economy better, but how that supplies
potatoes does not get asked.
So there is a shortage of potatoes, the price will rise and there are
other options to potatoes, eg rice.
So a another diversion from the co-goverance issue for example.
So apart from saying that the polls are inconclusive at this stage,
there is little value in the polls; and partisan websites such as
Kiwiblog are struggling to find anything really worth talking about .
. .
On 27 May 2023 00:52:45 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-26, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Gordon I think you are incorrect in your definitions:
On Fri, 26 May 2023 10:02:22 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.html >>>>I too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believe
It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition >>>>leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the >>>>subsequent election.
that it really says anything about this year - in either direction.
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position >>>>In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that >>>>drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that >>>>drives party policy popularity.
The polls do seem to diverge a little more than normal - the latest
one had figures for the small parties - most around 1%, but in other
polls they have not always been there. Somehow a 48% total for ACT and
National was turned into a certain prediction that the party vote for
the smaller parties would turn that into about 51% for Act/National; I
did not see any explanation for that, and could not be bothered trying
to work out the assumptions that led there.
The assumptions are that x+y+z=51%. The talking point should be how can a >>majority Goverment happen, as in which parties total 51%. To me this is what >>one should focous on. At present we are going to the wire.
We may end up with a minority Government.
1. A 'minority' government is one formed by a single party that has
less than half of all Parliamentary seats. It governs by securing >'confidence and supply' agreements with other parties to secure more
than half the Parliamentary seats. Examples of this was the Clark-led
Labour Governments of 1999-2008.
2. A Coalition government is one formed by two (or more) parties, each
of which is part of the Government. An example of this was the
National/NZF government of 1996-1998. We have only ever had a
coalition of 2 parties - never 3 or more.
3. A combination of (1) and (2). An example of this was the
Labour/NZF coalition supported by confidence-and-supply with the
Greens in 2017.
4. A majority government. This is where a single party secures more
than 50% of Parliamentary seats. This is the current government and
the first such government in the MMP era.
Based on current polling we are unlikely to have (4) and could have
and of 1-3 after the upcoming election.
My perception is that at this stage some of the media "personalities"
are trying to turn commentary to it being a close election - more
because that is nice for news stories than because the polls are
particularly decisive. So it is all a circus at present; with costs
being an obvious issue
How about eggs?
- for example supplies of potatoes are clearly
low; my local wholesaler is restricting sales of frozen potato chips;
effectively to ensure that commercial customers get priority -
potatoes and some other crops were badly hit by the cyclones, and may
not recover to at least a couple of years. Yet there is no mention of
that, the implication being that "something should be done" - the
government has enough with restoring infrastructure, which the
opposition claims is wasteful spending - without subsidising crops in
short supply because of the cyclone, or increased international
prices. The Opposition are walking around the issue, implying that
they would have managed the economy better, but how that supplies
potatoes does not get asked.
So there is a shortage of potatoes, the price will rise and there are
other options to potatoes, eg rice.
So a another diversion from the co-goverance issue for example.
So apart from saying that the polls are inconclusive at this stage,
there is little value in the polls; and partisan websites such as
Kiwiblog are struggling to find anything really worth talking about .
. .
On 27 May 2023 00:52:45 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-26, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Gordon I think you are incorrect in your definitions:
On Fri, 26 May 2023 10:02:22 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.html >>>>I too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believe
It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition >>>>leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the >>>>subsequent election.
that it really says anything about this year - in either direction.
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position >>>>In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that >>>>drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that >>>>drives party policy popularity.
The polls do seem to diverge a little more than normal - the latest
one had figures for the small parties - most around 1%, but in other
polls they have not always been there. Somehow a 48% total for ACT and
National was turned into a certain prediction that the party vote for
the smaller parties would turn that into about 51% for Act/National; I
did not see any explanation for that, and could not be bothered trying
to work out the assumptions that led there.
The assumptions are that x+y+z=51%. The talking point should be how can a >>majority Goverment happen, as in which parties total 51%. To me this is what >>one should focous on. At present we are going to the wire.
We may end up with a minority Government.
1. A 'minority' government is one formed by a single party that has
less than half of all Parliamentary seats. It governs by securing 'confidence and supply' agreements with other parties to secure more
than half the Parliamentary seats. Examples of this was the Clark-led
Labour Governments of 1999-2008.
2. A Coalition government is one formed by two (or more) parties, each
of which is part of the Government. An example of this was the
National/NZF government of 1996-1998. We have only ever had a
coalition of 2 parties - never 3 or more.
3. A combination of (1) and (2). An example of this was the
Labour/NZF coalition supported by confidence-and-supply with the
Greens in 2017.
4. A majority government. This is where a single party secures more
than 50% of Parliamentary seats. This is the current government and
the first such government in the MMP era.
Based on current polling we are unlikely to have (4) and could have
and of 1-3 after the upcoming election.
My perception is that at this stage some of the media "personalities"
are trying to turn commentary to it being a close election - more
because that is nice for news stories than because the polls are
particularly decisive. So it is all a circus at present; with costs
being an obvious issue
How about eggs?
- for example supplies of potatoes are clearly
low; my local wholesaler is restricting sales of frozen potato chips;
effectively to ensure that commercial customers get priority -
potatoes and some other crops were badly hit by the cyclones, and may
not recover to at least a couple of years. Yet there is no mention of
that, the implication being that "something should be done" - the
government has enough with restoring infrastructure, which the
opposition claims is wasteful spending - without subsidising crops in
short supply because of the cyclone, or increased international
prices. The Opposition are walking around the issue, implying that
they would have managed the economy better, but how that supplies
potatoes does not get asked.
So there is a shortage of potatoes, the price will rise and there are
other options to potatoes, eg rice.
So a another diversion from the co-goverance issue for example.
So apart from saying that the polls are inconclusive at this stage,
there is little value in the polls; and partisan websites such as
Kiwiblog are struggling to find anything really worth talking about .
. .
On 2023-05-27, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:No, if a clear majority of voters want a particular party, then that
On 27 May 2023 00:52:45 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-26, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Gordon I think you are incorrect in your definitions:
On Fri, 26 May 2023 10:02:22 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
I too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believeIt seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition >>>>>leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the >>>>>subsequent election.https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.html >>>>>
that it really says anything about this year - in either direction.
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position >>>>>In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that >>>>>drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that >>>>>drives party policy popularity.
The polls do seem to diverge a little more than normal - the latest
one had figures for the small parties - most around 1%, but in other
polls they have not always been there. Somehow a 48% total for ACT and >>>> National was turned into a certain prediction that the party vote for
the smaller parties would turn that into about 51% for Act/National; I >>>> did not see any explanation for that, and could not be bothered trying >>>> to work out the assumptions that led there.
The assumptions are that x+y+z=51%. The talking point should be how can a >>>majority Goverment happen, as in which parties total 51%. To me this is what >>>one should focous on. At present we are going to the wire.
We may end up with a minority Government.
1. A 'minority' government is one formed by a single party that has
less than half of all Parliamentary seats. It governs by securing
'confidence and supply' agreements with other parties to secure more
than half the Parliamentary seats. Examples of this was the Clark-led
Labour Governments of 1999-2008.
Thanks for that clarity. I was missing the 'confidence and supply'
agreements which are needed for a stable Government
2. A Coalition government is one formed by two (or more) parties, each
of which is part of the Government. An example of this was the
National/NZF government of 1996-1998. We have only ever had a
coalition of 2 parties - never 3 or more.
3. A combination of (1) and (2). An example of this was the
Labour/NZF coalition supported by confidence-and-supply with the
Greens in 2017.
4. A majority government. This is where a single party secures more
than 50% of Parliamentary seats. This is the current government and
the first such government in the MMP era.
And the last I hope. MMP was introduced to stop this absolute power.
Based on current polling we are unlikely to have (4) and could have
and of 1-3 after the upcoming election.
My perception is that at this stage some of the media "personalities"
are trying to turn commentary to it being a close election - more
because that is nice for news stories than because the polls are
particularly decisive. So it is all a circus at present; with costs
being an obvious issue
How about eggs?
- for example supplies of potatoes are clearly
low; my local wholesaler is restricting sales of frozen potato chips;
effectively to ensure that commercial customers get priority -
potatoes and some other crops were badly hit by the cyclones, and may
not recover to at least a couple of years. Yet there is no mention of
that, the implication being that "something should be done" - the
government has enough with restoring infrastructure, which the
opposition claims is wasteful spending - without subsidising crops in
short supply because of the cyclone, or increased international
prices. The Opposition are walking around the issue, implying that
they would have managed the economy better, but how that supplies
potatoes does not get asked.
So there is a shortage of potatoes, the price will rise and there are >>>other options to potatoes, eg rice.
So a another diversion from the co-goverance issue for example.
So apart from saying that the polls are inconclusive at this stage,
there is little value in the polls; and partisan websites such as
Kiwiblog are struggling to find anything really worth talking about .
. .
On 27 May 2023 04:57:51 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-27, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:No, if a clear majority of voters want a particular party, then that
On 27 May 2023 00:52:45 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-26, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Gordon I think you are incorrect in your definitions:
On Fri, 26 May 2023 10:02:22 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>> wrote:
I too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believe >>>>> that it really says anything about this year - in either direction.It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition >>>>>>leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the >>>>>>subsequent election.https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.html >>>>>>
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position >>>>>>In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that >>>>>>drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that >>>>>>drives party policy popularity.
The polls do seem to diverge a little more than normal - the latest
one had figures for the small parties - most around 1%, but in other >>>>> polls they have not always been there. Somehow a 48% total for ACT and >>>>> National was turned into a certain prediction that the party vote for >>>>> the smaller parties would turn that into about 51% for Act/National; I >>>>> did not see any explanation for that, and could not be bothered trying >>>>> to work out the assumptions that led there.
The assumptions are that x+y+z=51%. The talking point should be how can a >>>>majority Goverment happen, as in which parties total 51%. To me this is what
one should focous on. At present we are going to the wire.
We may end up with a minority Government.
1. A 'minority' government is one formed by a single party that has
less than half of all Parliamentary seats. It governs by securing
'confidence and supply' agreements with other parties to secure more
than half the Parliamentary seats. Examples of this was the Clark-led
Labour Governments of 1999-2008.
Thanks for that clarity. I was missing the 'confidence and supply' >>agreements which are needed for a stable Government
2. A Coalition government is one formed by two (or more) parties, each
of which is part of the Government. An example of this was the
National/NZF government of 1996-1998. We have only ever had a
coalition of 2 parties - never 3 or more.
3. A combination of (1) and (2). An example of this was the
Labour/NZF coalition supported by confidence-and-supply with the
Greens in 2017.
4. A majority government. This is where a single party secures more
than 50% of Parliamentary seats. This is the current government and
the first such government in the MMP era.
And the last I hope. MMP was introduced to stop this absolute power.
is what the system should deliver.
Where the current system falls down
is insisting that there be a threshold of 5% support for a party to
get any MP elected - unless that party gets an electorate seat.
The last poll had NZ First at 4%, Te Pati Maori at 2%, and TOP,
Democracy NZ, New Conservative, Aotearoa Legalise Cannbis all on 1%
If those percentages held (and remember there is a 12% undecided)
those Te Pati Maori may win an electorate seat, and get say 2 seats
while NZ First with higher support may get none. To be a fair system,
no threshold is needed.
If the Democrats and Republicans can negotiate to get legislation
through in the USA, then a government should be able to get
legislation through a multi-party government - even if that meant a
Labour / National coalition!
Based on current polling we are unlikely to have (4) and could have
and of 1-3 after the upcoming election.
My perception is that at this stage some of the media "personalities" >>>>> are trying to turn commentary to it being a close election - more
because that is nice for news stories than because the polls are
particularly decisive. So it is all a circus at present; with costs
being an obvious issue
How about eggs?
- for example supplies of potatoes are clearly
low; my local wholesaler is restricting sales of frozen potato chips; >>>>> effectively to ensure that commercial customers get priority -
potatoes and some other crops were badly hit by the cyclones, and may >>>>> not recover to at least a couple of years. Yet there is no mention of >>>>> that, the implication being that "something should be done" - the
government has enough with restoring infrastructure, which the
opposition claims is wasteful spending - without subsidising crops in >>>>> short supply because of the cyclone, or increased international
prices. The Opposition are walking around the issue, implying that
they would have managed the economy better, but how that supplies
potatoes does not get asked.
So there is a shortage of potatoes, the price will rise and there are >>>>other options to potatoes, eg rice.
So a another diversion from the co-goverance issue for example.
So apart from saying that the polls are inconclusive at this stage,
there is little value in the polls; and partisan websites such as
Kiwiblog are struggling to find anything really worth talking about . >>>>> . .
On Sat, 27 May 2023 18:56:55 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>It would deliver were that situation to be experienced again.
wrote:
On 27 May 2023 04:57:51 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-27, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:No, if a clear majority of voters want a particular party, then that
On 27 May 2023 00:52:45 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-26, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Gordon I think you are incorrect in your definitions:
On Fri, 26 May 2023 10:02:22 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>>> wrote:
I too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believe >>>>>> that it really says anything about this year - in either direction. >>>>>>It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition >>>>>>>leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the >>>>>>>subsequent election.https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.html >>>>>>>
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position >>>>>>>In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that >>>>>>>drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that >>>>>>>drives party policy popularity.
The polls do seem to diverge a little more than normal - the latest >>>>>> one had figures for the small parties - most around 1%, but in other >>>>>> polls they have not always been there. Somehow a 48% total for ACT and >>>>>> National was turned into a certain prediction that the party vote for >>>>>> the smaller parties would turn that into about 51% for Act/National; I >>>>>> did not see any explanation for that, and could not be bothered trying >>>>>> to work out the assumptions that led there.
The assumptions are that x+y+z=51%. The talking point should be how can a >>>>>majority Goverment happen, as in which parties total 51%. To me this is what
one should focous on. At present we are going to the wire.
We may end up with a minority Government.
1. A 'minority' government is one formed by a single party that has
less than half of all Parliamentary seats. It governs by securing
'confidence and supply' agreements with other parties to secure more
than half the Parliamentary seats. Examples of this was the Clark-led >>>> Labour Governments of 1999-2008.
Thanks for that clarity. I was missing the 'confidence and supply' >>>agreements which are needed for a stable Government
2. A Coalition government is one formed by two (or more) parties, each >>>> of which is part of the Government. An example of this was the
National/NZF government of 1996-1998. We have only ever had a
coalition of 2 parties - never 3 or more.
3. A combination of (1) and (2). An example of this was the
Labour/NZF coalition supported by confidence-and-supply with the
Greens in 2017.
4. A majority government. This is where a single party secures more
than 50% of Parliamentary seats. This is the current government and
the first such government in the MMP era.
And the last I hope. MMP was introduced to stop this absolute power.
is what the system should deliver.
Agreed. Though the circumstances in 2020 that led to a majority
government are unlikely ever to be repeated.
Where the current system falls down
is insisting that there be a threshold of 5% support for a party to
get any MP elected - unless that party gets an electorate seat.
The last poll had NZ First at 4%, Te Pati Maori at 2%, and TOP,
Democracy NZ, New Conservative, Aotearoa Legalise Cannbis all on 1%
If those percentages held (and remember there is a 12% undecided)
those Te Pati Maori may win an electorate seat, and get say 2 seats
while NZ First with higher support may get none. To be a fair system,
no threshold is needed.
Look at the results in 2020:
https://electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2020/
15 parties received at least 0.1% of party votes. Clearly a threshold
is needed so it is an issue of what setting. Given that there are 60
list seats it could be argued that the threshold should be 1.7% but
that would mean only that in 2020 NZF would have got either 1 or 2
seats and the other 11 parties below them would have missed that
threshold.
MMP addressed the situation where in one election Social Credit got
around 20% of the popular vote and no MPs - because in FPP all those
votes were split over 80 electorates with not enough in any one
electorate to win outright. MMP delivered in that respect.
If the Democrats and Republicans can negotiate to get legislation
through in the USA, then a government should be able to get
legislation through a multi-party government - even if that meant a
Labour / National coalition!
The political machinery of the USA is completely irrelevant to the NZ >political machinery.
The latest poll has 12% declined to respond - the presumption that
Based on current polling we are unlikely to have (4) and could have
and of 1-3 after the upcoming election.
My perception is that at this stage some of the media "personalities" >>>>>> are trying to turn commentary to it being a close election - more
because that is nice for news stories than because the polls are
particularly decisive. So it is all a circus at present; with costs >>>>>> being an obvious issue
How about eggs?
- for example supplies of potatoes are clearly
low; my local wholesaler is restricting sales of frozen potato chips; >>>>>> effectively to ensure that commercial customers get priority -
potatoes and some other crops were badly hit by the cyclones, and may >>>>>> not recover to at least a couple of years. Yet there is no mention of >>>>>> that, the implication being that "something should be done" - the
government has enough with restoring infrastructure, which the
opposition claims is wasteful spending - without subsidising crops in >>>>>> short supply because of the cyclone, or increased international
prices. The Opposition are walking around the issue, implying that >>>>>> they would have managed the economy better, but how that supplies
potatoes does not get asked.
So there is a shortage of potatoes, the price will rise and there are >>>>>other options to potatoes, eg rice.
So a another diversion from the co-goverance issue for example.
So apart from saying that the polls are inconclusive at this stage, >>>>>> there is little value in the polls; and partisan websites such as
Kiwiblog are struggling to find anything really worth talking about . >>>>>> . .
On Sun, 28 May 2023 17:21:07 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Sat, 27 May 2023 18:56:55 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:It would deliver were that situation to be experienced again.
On 27 May 2023 04:57:51 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-27, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:No, if a clear majority of voters want a particular party, then that
On 27 May 2023 00:52:45 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-26, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Gordon I think you are incorrect in your definitions:
On Fri, 26 May 2023 10:02:22 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>>>> wrote:
I too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believe >>>>>>> that it really says anything about this year - in either direction. >>>>>>>It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition >>>>>>>>leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the >>>>>>>>subsequent election.https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.html >>>>>>>>
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position >>>>>>>>In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that >>>>>>>>drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that >>>>>>>>drives party policy popularity.
The polls do seem to diverge a little more than normal - the latest >>>>>>> one had figures for the small parties - most around 1%, but in other >>>>>>> polls they have not always been there. Somehow a 48% total for ACT and >>>>>>> National was turned into a certain prediction that the party vote for >>>>>>> the smaller parties would turn that into about 51% for Act/National; I >>>>>>> did not see any explanation for that, and could not be bothered trying >>>>>>> to work out the assumptions that led there.
The assumptions are that x+y+z=51%. The talking point should be how can a >>>>>>majority Goverment happen, as in which parties total 51%. To me this is what
one should focous on. At present we are going to the wire.
We may end up with a minority Government.
1. A 'minority' government is one formed by a single party that has >>>>> less than half of all Parliamentary seats. It governs by securing
'confidence and supply' agreements with other parties to secure more >>>>> than half the Parliamentary seats. Examples of this was the Clark-led >>>>> Labour Governments of 1999-2008.
Thanks for that clarity. I was missing the 'confidence and supply' >>>>agreements which are needed for a stable Government
2. A Coalition government is one formed by two (or more) parties, each >>>>> of which is part of the Government. An example of this was the
National/NZF government of 1996-1998. We have only ever had a
coalition of 2 parties - never 3 or more.
3. A combination of (1) and (2). An example of this was the
Labour/NZF coalition supported by confidence-and-supply with the
Greens in 2017.
4. A majority government. This is where a single party secures more >>>>> than 50% of Parliamentary seats. This is the current government and >>>>> the first such government in the MMP era.
And the last I hope. MMP was introduced to stop this absolute power.
is what the system should deliver.
Agreed. Though the circumstances in 2020 that led to a majority
government are unlikely ever to be repeated.
Where the current system falls down
is insisting that there be a threshold of 5% support for a party to
get any MP elected - unless that party gets an electorate seat.
The last poll had NZ First at 4%, Te Pati Maori at 2%, and TOP,
Democracy NZ, New Conservative, Aotearoa Legalise Cannbis all on 1%
If those percentages held (and remember there is a 12% undecided)
those Te Pati Maori may win an electorate seat, and get say 2 seats
while NZ First with higher support may get none. To be a fair system,
no threshold is needed.
Look at the results in 2020:
https://electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2020/
15 parties received at least 0.1% of party votes. Clearly a threshold
is needed so it is an issue of what setting. Given that there are 60
list seats it could be argued that the threshold should be 1.7% but
that would mean only that in 2020 NZF would have got either 1 or 2
seats and the other 11 parties below them would have missed that
threshold.
MMP addressed the situation where in one election Social Credit got
around 20% of the popular vote and no MPs - because in FPP all those
votes were split over 80 electorates with not enough in any one
electorate to win outright. MMP delivered in that respect.
Consider two parties with say just under 5% of the party vote. If only
one of those parties gets an electorate seat, it would get more than
one vote in parliament, but the other party would get none. I do not
believe that is fair.
If the Democrats and Republicans can negotiate to get legislation
through in the USA, then a government should be able to get
legislation through a multi-party government - even if that meant a >>>Labour / National coalition!
The political machinery of the USA is completely irrelevant to the NZ >>political machinery.
The ability to compromise is however desirable in both countries. New
Zealand does not have the extent of highly charged partisan support
that the USA holds, but there could be a situation where a logical >arrangement may at least in theory be a Labour / National Party
coalition
The latest poll has 12% declined to respond - the presumption that
Based on current polling we are unlikely to have (4) and could have
and of 1-3 after the upcoming election.
ignoring them does not change the actual overall preference
percentages is clearly wrong. The results are a very rough guide, and
that probably explains why there are fluctuations in support for
particular parties. We cannot be sure which main party is likely to be
able to form a government, and support for any particular party could
be significantly different from the results of the latest poll.
My perception is that at this stage some of the media "personalities" >>>>>>> are trying to turn commentary to it being a close election - more >>>>>>> because that is nice for news stories than because the polls are >>>>>>> particularly decisive. So it is all a circus at present; with costs >>>>>>> being an obvious issue
How about eggs?
- for example supplies of potatoes are clearly
low; my local wholesaler is restricting sales of frozen potato chips; >>>>>>> effectively to ensure that commercial customers get priority -
potatoes and some other crops were badly hit by the cyclones, and may >>>>>>> not recover to at least a couple of years. Yet there is no mention of >>>>>>> that, the implication being that "something should be done" - the >>>>>>> government has enough with restoring infrastructure, which the
opposition claims is wasteful spending - without subsidising crops in >>>>>>> short supply because of the cyclone, or increased international
prices. The Opposition are walking around the issue, implying that >>>>>>> they would have managed the economy better, but how that supplies >>>>>>> potatoes does not get asked.
So there is a shortage of potatoes, the price will rise and there are >>>>>>other options to potatoes, eg rice.
So a another diversion from the co-goverance issue for example.
So apart from saying that the polls are inconclusive at this stage, >>>>>>> there is little value in the polls; and partisan websites such as >>>>>>> Kiwiblog are struggling to find anything really worth talking about . >>>>>>> . .
On Sun, 28 May 2023 21:35:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>That is now, but have there been parties that have received enough
wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2023 17:21:07 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Sat, 27 May 2023 18:56:55 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:It would deliver were that situation to be experienced again.
On 27 May 2023 04:57:51 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-27, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:is what the system should deliver.
On 27 May 2023 00:52:45 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-05-26, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Gordon I think you are incorrect in your definitions:
On Fri, 26 May 2023 10:02:22 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>>>>> wrote:
I too have seen that comment, and while it is true, I do not believe >>>>>>>> that it really says anything about this year - in either direction. >>>>>>>>https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2023/05/leaders_in_preferred_pm_ratings.html
It seems that historically in May of election years, some opposition >>>>>>>>>leaders with numbers similar to Luxon have gone on to win the >>>>>>>>>subsequent election.
This gives the lie to comments that Luxon is in a disastrous position >>>>>>>>>In my opinion this reinforces the notion that it is party policy that >>>>>>>>>drives primary voter support and it is the election campaign that >>>>>>>>>drives party policy popularity.
The polls do seem to diverge a little more than normal - the latest >>>>>>>> one had figures for the small parties - most around 1%, but in other >>>>>>>> polls they have not always been there. Somehow a 48% total for ACT and >>>>>>>> National was turned into a certain prediction that the party vote for >>>>>>>> the smaller parties would turn that into about 51% for Act/National; I >>>>>>>> did not see any explanation for that, and could not be bothered trying >>>>>>>> to work out the assumptions that led there.
The assumptions are that x+y+z=51%. The talking point should be how can a
majority Goverment happen, as in which parties total 51%. To me this is what
one should focous on. At present we are going to the wire.
We may end up with a minority Government.
1. A 'minority' government is one formed by a single party that has >>>>>> less than half of all Parliamentary seats. It governs by securing >>>>>> 'confidence and supply' agreements with other parties to secure more >>>>>> than half the Parliamentary seats. Examples of this was the Clark-led >>>>>> Labour Governments of 1999-2008.
Thanks for that clarity. I was missing the 'confidence and supply' >>>>>agreements which are needed for a stable Government
2. A Coalition government is one formed by two (or more) parties, each >>>>>> of which is part of the Government. An example of this was the
National/NZF government of 1996-1998. We have only ever had a
coalition of 2 parties - never 3 or more.
3. A combination of (1) and (2). An example of this was the
Labour/NZF coalition supported by confidence-and-supply with the
Greens in 2017.
4. A majority government. This is where a single party secures more >>>>>> than 50% of Parliamentary seats. This is the current government and >>>>>> the first such government in the MMP era.
And the last I hope. MMP was introduced to stop this absolute power. >>>>No, if a clear majority of voters want a particular party, then that
Agreed. Though the circumstances in 2020 that led to a majority >>>government are unlikely ever to be repeated.
Where the current system falls down
is insisting that there be a threshold of 5% support for a party to
get any MP elected - unless that party gets an electorate seat.
The last poll had NZ First at 4%, Te Pati Maori at 2%, and TOP, >>>>Democracy NZ, New Conservative, Aotearoa Legalise Cannbis all on 1%
If those percentages held (and remember there is a 12% undecided)
those Te Pati Maori may win an electorate seat, and get say 2 seats >>>>while NZ First with higher support may get none. To be a fair system, >>>>no threshold is needed.
Look at the results in 2020:
https://electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2020/
15 parties received at least 0.1% of party votes. Clearly a threshold
is needed so it is an issue of what setting. Given that there are 60 >>>list seats it could be argued that the threshold should be 1.7% but
that would mean only that in 2020 NZF would have got either 1 or 2
seats and the other 11 parties below them would have missed that >>>threshold.
MMP addressed the situation where in one election Social Credit got >>>around 20% of the popular vote and no MPs - because in FPP all those >>>votes were split over 80 electorates with not enough in any one >>>electorate to win outright. MMP delivered in that respect.
Consider two parties with say just under 5% of the party vote. If only
one of those parties gets an electorate seat, it would get more than
one vote in parliament, but the other party would get none. I do not >>believe that is fair.
It has not happened. No party that failed to reach the 5% threshold
has polled more than 3%. In fact all the parties that polled under 5%
have not totaled 5% of party votes between them that I recall. I
acknowledge your point on fairness in an example but you did not
suggest how this could be addressed.
If the Democrats and Republicans can negotiate to get legislation >>>>through in the USA, then a government should be able to get
legislation through a multi-party government - even if that meant a >>>>Labour / National coalition!
The political machinery of the USA is completely irrelevant to the NZ >>>political machinery.
The ability to compromise is however desirable in both countries. New >>Zealand does not have the extent of highly charged partisan support
that the USA holds, but there could be a situation where a logical >>arrangement may at least in theory be a Labour / National Party
coalition
The latest poll has 12% declined to respond - the presumption that
Based on current polling we are unlikely to have (4) and could have >>>>>> and of 1-3 after the upcoming election.
ignoring them does not change the actual overall preference
percentages is clearly wrong. The results are a very rough guide, and
that probably explains why there are fluctuations in support for
particular parties. We cannot be sure which main party is likely to be
able to form a government, and support for any particular party could
be significantly different from the results of the latest poll.
My perception is that at this stage some of the media "personalities" >>>>>>>> are trying to turn commentary to it being a close election - more >>>>>>>> because that is nice for news stories than because the polls are >>>>>>>> particularly decisive. So it is all a circus at present; with costs >>>>>>>> being an obvious issue
How about eggs?
- for example supplies of potatoes are clearly
low; my local wholesaler is restricting sales of frozen potato chips; >>>>>>>> effectively to ensure that commercial customers get priority - >>>>>>>> potatoes and some other crops were badly hit by the cyclones, and may >>>>>>>> not recover to at least a couple of years. Yet there is no mention of >>>>>>>> that, the implication being that "something should be done" - the >>>>>>>> government has enough with restoring infrastructure, which the >>>>>>>> opposition claims is wasteful spending - without subsidising crops in >>>>>>>> short supply because of the cyclone, or increased international >>>>>>>> prices. The Opposition are walking around the issue, implying that >>>>>>>> they would have managed the economy better, but how that supplies >>>>>>>> potatoes does not get asked.
So there is a shortage of potatoes, the price will rise and there are >>>>>>>other options to potatoes, eg rice.
So a another diversion from the co-goverance issue for example.
So apart from saying that the polls are inconclusive at this stage, >>>>>>>> there is little value in the polls; and partisan websites such as >>>>>>>> Kiwiblog are struggling to find anything really worth talking about . >>>>>>>> . .
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 107:08:38 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,335,482 |