Daily review 03/12/2021

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, December 3rd, 2021 - 38 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

38 comments on “Daily review 03/12/2021 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. swordfish 1
    3 December 2021 at 6:11 pm

    .

    Last Roy Morgan of the year:

    Lab 36.0% ……. Down 3.5

    Green 10.5% … Unchanged

    = 46.5%

    .

    Nat 26.5% ……. Up 0.5

    ACT 17.5% ……. Up 1.5

    = 44.0%

    .

    Maori 3.0% ……. Up 1.0

    NZF 2.5% …… Unchanged

    TOP 1.5% ……… Up 0.5

    New Con 1.0% Down 0.5

    Others 1.5%

  2. swordfish 2
    3 December 2021 at 6:45 pm

    .

    Labour, ACT & Maori = significant gender skew.

    Labour: Women 43.5% … / Men 28.0%

    Green: Women 10.5% … / Men 11.0%

    National: Women 26.5% … / Men 27.0%

    ACT: Women 10.0% … / Men 25.0%

    Maori: Women 4.0% … / Men 1.5%

    • swordfish 2.1
      3 December 2021 at 6:58 pm

      .

      So, according to the latest RM … Men are relatively evenly split between Labour (28%), National (27%) & ACT (25%).

      But that hides something of an age divide:

      Younger Men = ACT (30%), Labour (23.5%), National (21.5%)

      Older Men = National (33.5%), Labour (33.0%), ACT (19%)

      • Cricklewood 2.1.1
        3 December 2021 at 7:00 pm

        Wow Seymour's really appealling to the younger male vote… might not lose as much back to National as I thought.

        • bwaghorn 2.1.1.1
          3 December 2021 at 7:48 pm

          Maybe hes waking some of the missing million. Not sure what he actually stands for myself.

          • Anne 2.1.1.1.1
            3 December 2021 at 9:04 pm

            He stands for opposing everything the government does and every decision they make. The fact this means he is constantly contradicting himself and his party’s policies (at least the few they seem to have) has apparently passed by a significant portion of the population.

        • Koff 2.1.1.2
          3 December 2021 at 7:49 pm

          The data that these stat breakdowns don't really show is what those involved in political polls are responding to: leader's personality, media coverage, policies of the different parties, broken promises, fatigue with the status quo, etc.

          There have been some strange government coalitions cobbled together in Europe recently where similar proportional represntation electoral systems exist. (cf. Germany where a centre left SPD is in coalition with the Greens and the FPD, (an ACT like party). The huge lead NZ Labour had (and squandered in my opinion) at the last GE was certainly very unusual.

  3. alwyn 3
    3 December 2021 at 8:30 pm

    Labour have nothing to worry about. As this poll shows they are quite safe with Collins at the helm (sorry Pucky).

    If, on the other hand she was replaced by someone electable they will be in trouble. Never going to happen of course. National are never going to pick someone like Luxon. Not a chance is there? If they did that Labour will be down the tubes by March next year.

    No worries though. Labour are safe. Luxon becoming leader is just a dream. Or a nightmare.

    • bwaghorn 3.1
      3 December 2021 at 9:03 pm

      Is that the same luxon who's already turned in to a dribbling bull dog barking at covid cars.

      Pathetic day out for him today.

    • Gezza 3.2
      3 December 2021 at 9:07 pm

      Luxon hasn’t said or done anything yet to justify a view that he & his caucus are going to be a stable, competent team. All his pronouncements have been stock standard stuff that the other failed leaders also came out with. May get a bit of a bounce thru not being Bridges, Muller or the (most disastrous) Collins, but let’s see how things pan out a month or two down the track when we have some idea of his policies & direction, & whether the constant backbiting, leaking & infighting in his caucus has stopped.

      I see someone referring to Luxon disparagingly as Conehead is apparently allowed here (even tho he doesn’t actually have a cone-shaped head). One wonders what terms of disparagement are equally allowed here for Ardern? Comments on her toothiness are stock standard over on Kiwblog.

      • Robert Guyton 3.2.1
        3 December 2021 at 9:18 pm

        It's a blessing then, that no one's used the word, "pessary".

        • Gezza 3.2.1.1
          3 December 2021 at 9:22 pm

          Only one plonker that I can see, so far, Robert. But let’s not name names in case it embarrasses them as it should being caught out being so childish.

      • Cricklewood 3.2.2
        3 December 2021 at 9:19 pm

        I don't actually think he has to do much, just dont be offensive. Judith was very polarizing if Luxon can run a very centrist path he'll get the Nats close to 35 and if Act hold onto their current vote it becomes a very close election.

        If the split on the right holds it puts them in strong positon in an mmp environment.

  4. Patricia Bremner 4
    3 December 2021 at 9:13 pm

    No most of us resist rude names. We generally look to beliefs actions and any policy statements, or even evident trends or perceived problems Cheers.

    • Gezza 4.1
      3 December 2021 at 9:18 pm

      So, what do you think of commenters here who use rude or disparaging names for the pollies they disagree with?

      • weka 4.1.1
        3 December 2021 at 9:33 pm

        you just called someone a plonker.

        • Gezza 4.1.1.1
          3 December 2021 at 9:39 pm

          Because they’re tried a sly dig to get away with name-calling, so they ARE actually plonking. I could use a more earthy descriptor if you like.

          Whereas Luxon hasn’t got a cone head.

          • weka 4.1.1.1.1
            3 December 2021 at 9:40 pm

            lol, so it's an accuracy things? Calling him baldy would be ok then?

            • Gezza 4.1.1.1.1.1
              3 December 2021 at 9:43 pm

              Sure, if calling Ardern toothy is equally acceptable. Is it?

              • weston …
                3 December 2021 at 10:04 pm

                Go ahead an call her toothy gezza im pretty sure she can handle it by now ditto shadbolt .Toothy is being kind horse face is downright mean but you decide and take the consequences i guess ?

                • Gezza …
                  3 December 2021 at 10:10 pm

                  Why would I want to do that? I am against commenters being allowed to get away with calling others – including pollies they don’t like – derogatory names.

                  I think it quickly lowers the tone of political discourse & analysis & it can become a race to the bottom when the main contribution of some commenters who like doing that is just to post a personal insult & bugger-all else.

              • weka …
                3 December 2021 at 10:12 pm

                why is not ok to call someone toothy (or baldy) but it is ok to call someone a plonker? Is it because they're comments on people's bodies?

                • Gezza …
                  3 December 2021 at 11:14 pm

                  No, it’s not ok to call anyone nasty names. The old saying sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me is wrong. Kids around the world and in NZ kill themselves over this very thing. Some adults do it too.

                  Calling someone a plonker, a stupid person, for childish name-calling is NOT the same thing as, say, my calling someone who posts here a walking haystack, which would be denigrating them based on their appearance.

                  People who don’t want to be called plonkers only have to stop plonking. Then it clearly doesn’t apply. I use it tinpommAnd if they don’t like being called a plonker then rhey should perhaps mull over whether the subject of THEIR nasty name calling deserves that either.

                  • RedLogix …
                    3 December 2021 at 11:51 pm

                    Appreciate your thoughts here and I generally agree with them. Name calling and pointless abuse have never been particularly welcome here, although in the spirit of robust debate moderation has always tolerated it to some degree, depending on context and patterns of behaviour.

                    Exactly where we draw the line is personal, different mods have different thresholds, and we make no claim to either completeness or consistency. We're volunteers who often find the task irksome, time consuming, and in the end most burn out and need to give it a break.

                    I'm delighted to see you advocating for a higher standard of debate, and fully endorse it. Yet getting to where you would hope will be more a matter of setting an example and inspiring others to follow, than hectoring and imposing.

                    • Gezza …
                      4 December 2021 at 6:58 am

                      I’m delighted to see you advocating for a higher standard of debate, and fully endorse it. Yet getting to where you would hope will be more a matter of setting an example and inspiring others to follow, than hectoring and imposing.*

                      Thanks for that carefully considered reply, RL. And I know that moderators take on a consiserable workload & appreciate that judgement calls have to be made in the absence of a site policy ban on derogatory name-calling. A site like this wouldn’t last long without moderators & I thank you all for taking on the job for free.

                      Re hectoring & imposing, I’m not. I AM leading by example. The example I’ve chosen to lead by in the last couple of days is mirroring name-callers’ behaviour back to them, to see what happens.

                      Some probably don’t like being on the receiving end of the very behaviour they themselves exhibit. Orhers have reacted with glee & accusations of double standards because they think they’ve caught me out doing what they do & successfully dragged me down into their toilet.

                      I’ll give it a rest now & see how leading by example has worked.

                  • weka …
                    4 December 2021 at 9:48 am

                    ok, so for you the boundary is where it's a personal comment about the person for something that they can't change, whereas calling them a name because of behaviour which is something they can change is ok.

                    I mostly agree with that. In terms of moderation on TS there's a line between intervening in things getting out of hand and not over moderating so commenting becomes tedious (or moderating becomes tedious).

                    There's also a difference between descriptors, pejoratives and the grey areas in between. And, personal comments aimed at other commenters will get a higher degree of moderation than people being rude about politicians.

                    I agree with RL that commenters can also help set the tone and culture of the site. In this case your comments have generated useful discussion about the issue 👍

                    • Gezza …
                      4 December 2021 at 10:30 am

                      As I had hoped it might.
                      Thank you, weka.

                      I had spent some time reading blogs before deciding which one to try my hand commenting on.

                      I spent most time reading Kiwiblog. Some of the discussions were worth reading & quite informative, but the sheer amount of denigratory labelling of political opponents & petty insults allowed there in the end decided me against registering to comment there.

                      I concluded that TS was better moderated & that in general there was a higher quality of commentary & discussion here, with only a relatively few posters posting mainly insults & derogatory epithets.