Green Party makes astounding poll recovery in 24 hours!

68 comments on “Green Party makes astounding poll recovery in 24 hours! ”

• Comments are now closed

1. DoublePlusGood 1

   19 August 2017 at 11:33 am

   You know, it’s strangely quiet on media websites about this poll. Wonder why?
   • dukeofurl 1.1

     19 August 2017 at 11:44 am

     Check the time period they were polling- its out of date
   • Stuart Munro 1.2

     19 August 2017 at 11:47 am

     Same reason Gower never ran a spiel about the Newshub online poll had the Greens ahead of Labour for three weeks, with the Gnats still in third place even after that.

     http://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2017/07/new-zealand-election-2017-the-big-issues-have-your-say.html
     • dukeofurl 1.2.1

       19 August 2017 at 12:17 pm

       Online polls are just clickbait- worth less for any real purpose.
       • Stuart Munro 1.2.1.1

         19 August 2017 at 12:30 pm

         If it’d given the result Gower was trying to sell he’d’ve run with it anyway.
     • Dspare 1.2.2

       19 August 2017 at 12:24 pm

       Pseudo-randomised phone polls have their limitations, but are a lot more credible than self-selected questionnaires. The NZH sometimes breathlessly announces the results of such as if they prove anything, but I suppose they figure that they have little credibility to loose. Newshub’s poll probably had more with determining the show’s audience to aid setting the ad schedule rather than fact discovery.

       [edit] Hey, look at that; I actually agree with dou for once!
     • Nope 1.2.3

       19 August 2017 at 12:50 pm

       Unbelievable stupidity. That was a self-selecting online poll.
   • Nope 1.3

     19 August 2017 at 12:51 pm

     Media organisations stopped reporting Roy Morgan some months ago. It’s notoriously unreliable and out of whack with all other polls.
2. dukeofurl 2

   19 August 2017 at 11:43 am

   Roy Morgan covers a longer time period
   “July 31 – August 13, 2017. ” and is strangely already a week old ?

   One news polling period ? 12–16 Aug 2017.

   A lot happened in the extra 12 days – ‘The Guns of August’ were very loud.

   In reality you would put RM as the first poll of the month to show the greens drop down 4.5% to 9 and then a later CM poll shows the drop even further to 4%
   • weka 2.1

     19 August 2017 at 11:46 am

     You might do that if you missed the point of the post.
     • Dspare 2.1.1

       19 August 2017 at 12:12 pm

       Or made the mistake of comparing between polling organisations, rather than within them along time. It is very tempting to treat polls as facts because they are so carefully enumerated. But they are a tool that has a more or less successful reflection of reality, rather than reality itself.

       There is a lot to be said for not publishing polls during an election (though the parties that could afford it, would do their own internal polling). However, you have to deal with the world as it is, rather than how you would like it to be.
     • dukeofurl 2.1.2

       19 August 2017 at 12:13 pm

       Details matter.
       People will say its down one week and up the other when its actually down and then down some more.

       Save your poll bounce headline for when it does happen.

       Theres enough fake news around for headline only readers without adding to it. Im sure you know that!
       • weka 2.1.2.1

         19 August 2017 at 12:16 pm

         Dude, the headline was satire. Read the post properly.
         • dukeofurl 2.1.2.1.1

           19 August 2017 at 12:18 pm

           Yes. You are are a smart and well informed person. Lots of other people arent

           The funny thing is they often make a big deal over small changes- just margin of error stuff- yet this time it was a big change that was real.
           The story should be : 4% is not the end- its the beginning
           • dukeofurl 2.1.2.1.1.1

             19 August 2017 at 12:34 pm

             Read the comments of people here calling for publication of opinion polls to be banned.
             Are they satire too? Suppress the news LOL
             • Dspare …

               19 August 2017 at 12:41 pm

               Poll results are not the news, they are the distraction.
             • weka …

               19 August 2017 at 1:05 pm

               How about I put up a post calling you a dick and ban you from commenting while the post discussion is active? I’m not going to do that because that would make me a dick, but that’s pretty much the level of debate we have in the MSM and polling.

               Some in the MSM (most as afar as I can tell but not all) are misusing their power to the extent that the polls and reporting on the polls then influence the next polls.

               Where people have institutional power they have responsibilities. I’m suggesting with this post that we don’t get distracted by the bias and instead focus on the stuff that’s real. Everyone has their reckons, which is fine and we can talk about that too, but there is a level of attack going on here that is not in service to the country or democracy and we need to be careful to not support that or buy into it.
               • dukeofurl …

                 19 August 2017 at 1:42 pm

                 Im not sure you know what ‘news’ is . Its always the unusual, the different etc

                 When labour dropped to their lowest polls numbers they accepted the message the polls were telling ( as their own polls agreed) and they changed the messenger.

                 meanwhile a Green supporter like you reacts to the message the polls are saying by some lame satire of the poll monkeys and others seem to think ‘bad polls for greens lets ban them’.
                 You would think they made the below 5% number up

                 national politics is very hard , not for the faint hearted- so grown up people just say things like- ‘The last 2 weeks news hasnt been good, the balance has changed with labour but our core message stays the same.’

                 Pyscho babble about institutional power just says- I still dont get it.
                 • weka …

                   19 August 2017 at 1:52 pm

                   You’ve missed the point of the post. That’s ok, it was written for lefties anyway.
                   • dukeofurl …

                     19 August 2017 at 5:09 pm

                     Im glad the voters have deserted the Greens to go to labour- which I have voted for for years.

                     Ive always thought a lot of Green voters are just labour voters who have better jobs and live in nicer houses anyway.
                   • weka …

                     19 August 2017 at 5:23 pm

                     Well done on finally getting to the point you really wanted to make.
                   • marty mars …

                     19 August 2017 at 5:25 pm

                     yes at last we now know what you think dou – pity it took so long to get there
                   • KJT …

                     19 August 2017 at 5:26 pm

                     Just more successful and intelligent ex Labour voters.

                     You got it!
                   • Tuppence Shrewsbury []

                     19 August 2017 at 6:11 pm

                     So it’s ok to be successful, embrace capitalism and be part of the housing and abandon your roots as long as you vote green…..

                     Probably shouldn’t go around criticising those on the right anymore, you’ve revealed yourself to basically be one of them but “right on”
                   • KJT …

                     19 August 2017 at 7:09 pm

                     Few false assumptions there TP.

                     But we expect that from right wing wannabees.
       • Bearded Git 2.1.2.2

         19 August 2017 at 2:33 pm

         The colmar brunton guy they interviewed on rnz said they did not call cellphones. How can this be accurate.

         Another thought is that green voters tend to be committed to and Wedded to policy….greens have polled 10-11％ for the last 6 years…the policies are the same so surely they can poll 8-9% at the election? Why change to the very pale green imitation….labour
         • lprent 2.1.2.2.1

           19 August 2017 at 2:48 pm

           It would give an accurate picture of the more conservative and older members of our electorate.

           In other words the people who still use and answer landlines. I am sure that averages about 50% across the whole country. But less than 25% in Auckland would be my bet, and not much more in the other main urban centres.

           When viewed in that light, Labours rise is more remarkable and the Greens drop unremarkable. I can’t remember when I saw a Auckland Green with a landline. But it is common amongst their more middle class ‘protest the system’ support
         • Anne 2.1.2.2.2

           19 August 2017 at 4:29 pm

           The colmar brunton guy they interviewed on rnz said they did not call cellphones. How can this be accurate.

           Which explains why they tend to be biased towards National. Which explains why the Nats have plunged into panic mode.
           • dukeofurl 2.1.2.2.2.1

             19 August 2017 at 5:14 pm

             Thats because they dont just survey the first 900 or so who answer the phone.
             Previous CM polls had Greens at 15%- is that wrong too ?

             Their survey response models the population by age groups etc. Having said that I understand getting people under 30 is quite difficult but they keep trying until the numbers are right.
             Roy Morgan says they do call cellphones
             • lprent …

               19 August 2017 at 5:51 pm

               Referring to the CM polls only calling landlines…

               Having said that I understand getting people under 30 is quite difficult but they keep trying until the numbers are right.

               The question isn’t that they try to get different demographics. The question is if their techniques mean that they are sampling from the same population as general population.

               I suspect that the population of people WITH land lines who are under 30 is quite different in political nounce to the OTHER population of people under 30 WITHOUT land lines.

               As an assertion, I’d like to say that the population of under 30s who have land line access are significantly more likely to be (compared to the same aged equivalents without land line access)

               1. more likely to be politically conservative.
               2. quite a lot more stupid.
               3. still be living at home with their parents or other relatives.
               4. to not have a masters equivalent tertiary qualification.
               5. more likely to vote national.

               and probably a pile of other characteristics.

               The reasons are connected. But the most significiant ones are 3 & 4, and 2 is often the cause. Landlines are expensive anachronisms these days that don’t fit anyone who doesn’t have a boring life. From what I have seen they are seldom acquired by anyone who is short of cash. Most people under 30 who have access to them are usually living at home or have their parents without cellphones (or scared of getting call charges) calling them all of the time.

               There is a pretty well documented research analysis (try the Waikato uni studies) that shows that younger adults who haven’t managed the break from their parents are far more likely to reflect their parents political beliefs than a similar demographic who have more parental independence. Since age demographic for National voters is far more like NZ First than the Greens, the lean to National would be expected (5).

               Now to disprove any of these assertions, you’d have to run or produce a post cellphone study that shows differences between younger people with landlines, and those without.

               In the meantime, those of us anchored in political realities rather than your obsolete ill thought through and just massively dated opinions about how polls are conducted, will just say that the CM poll is usually conservatively biased just because of how they sample.
               • dukeofurl …

                 19 August 2017 at 6:56 pm

                 Well their last poll- “that must be wrong” had the Greens at 15%.

                 So its only wrong when its a bad result for Greens ?

                 Im a much older group and dont have a landline either.

                 I get your point thats its not a truly random poll, its sort of pseudo random. People have commented that the pollsters call and the first question is ‘ could they speak to a person over 18 and under 28 (or so)’

                 But for the Greens their problem isnt with the polls- who over estimate their support compared to those who end up voting. It could be nearly 2%
                 • Draco T Bastard …

                   19 August 2017 at 7:23 pm

                   So its only wrong when its a bad result for Greens ?

                   No, they’re wrong all the time which is why the bandwagon effect that they produce is such a major issue.
                   • dukeofurl …

                     20 August 2017 at 7:27 am

                     Any evidence of that ?
                     They are a statistical technique which is well used for a lot of things.

                     Medicine trials use them. The plane you fly in would have parts made where statistics plays a part in establishing they are within tolerances.

                     Using a smaller number to represent a very large number is a valid technique.

                     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_New_Zealand_general_election,_2014

                     Even though RM last poll was taken over a week before election they got national at 46.5 when election day had them at 47.0

                     Unfortunately the Greens was below the poll number, 10.7 to 13.5

                     There is no evidence to back your claim of being essentially wrong and outside the margin of error.
                   • lprent …

                     21 August 2017 at 3:09 pm

                     The problem isn’t the statistics. They are probably accurately representing that population pretty closely. When you look at it closely, it isn’t even psuedo-random unless by some highly unlikely coincidences. It has a systematic bias based on the means of polling.

                     The problem is if the population that they are sampling from is an accurate representation of the voting population. Consider that listed landlines in a Auckland urban suburb like Mt Albert last time I looked (2014) was starting to drop below 40% of all households and dropping at an accelerated rate, whereas in the same city at the same time in some north shore suburbs it was over 60%, and some of the south Auckland suburbs at about 25%. Meanwhile some southern towns have over 80% listed landlines to households.

                     This had direct and highly statistically significiant correlations with electoral voting and turnout patterns in those same areas

                     That is one city. Pollsters would have to be asking a lot of questions to try to delineate their selection criteria. Like where do you live? But they often don’t ask that. They are relying on exchange numbers in an age where we have had several decades of number portability and essentially free national calling using VoIP and cell. Friend of mine still has his ChCh number a decade after he moved to Auckland.

                     Sure you can mitigate that somewhat with autodialling numbers. But unlisted numbers used to be less than 10% in any area (they are now more with people moving to VoIP). But increasingly people have moved to bare IP with no V0IP and a cell.

                     For obvious reasons access to phone lines has always been something that isn’t looked at that closely since the 1960s. It was always high enough to represent the populations.

                     There are a number of other issues, like the inaccuracies from the unreported hangups (systematically changes the population again). So what they are measuring is the population who are conservative enough to still have and still answer a phoneline, and be willing to chew up 15 minutes taking a poll.

                     In Mt Albert where I live that probably means that they are sampling from the strange portion of about 10-15% of the population who aren’t working hard out, have a short commute, or are at home without kids. And they answered the phone. You have to warped to do that in Auckland. I have an unlisted landline for my partners mother. I turned it back on again last month. However she has been drowned out by auto dialling fraudsters from the subcontinent wanting to talk to me about the serious security issue on my computers.

                     But basically Draco is correct when he says

                     …they’re wrong all the time which is why the bandwagon effect that they produce is such a major issue.

                     You can only really use them for looking at trends. Especially this far out from an election.

                     They get a *lot* more accurate a few days from the election. That is because more people have made up their mind. But even so, most of the polls (as you point out for RM and the Greens in the 2nd week of September 2014) stretch credibility to the bounds of their sampling error
3. marty mars 3

   19 August 2017 at 11:56 am

   Yep good call and post. Good to hear this from ardern cos it shows she is a big thinker not a (deleted) like some of her supporters. Im feeling really good about this election.
4. WILD KATIPO 4

   19 August 2017 at 12:09 pm

   Yeah , so much worry from the right about knocking the Greens out , – it just aint gonna happen. Aderns Labour will be in govt, and the Greens are going to truck on through and be there as well. You wait and see on the day.

   The Greens are like Daggy Boy.

   Flea Race – YouTube
   you tube▶ 3:41
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5cAQ3E5Hqk
5. Dan 5

   19 August 2017 at 12:29 pm

   Nostalgia!! John Clarke… so sad he has gone. Still hilarious. Who was the well known race-caller he was imitating?
   • Dazzer 5.1

     19 August 2017 at 12:40 pm

     I’m thinking it was Alan Bright around 1976
6. Nope 6

   19 August 2017 at 12:49 pm

   Amazed anyone still takes the Roy Morgan seriously. It’s the least credible of polls, to the point that media hardly even cover it these days.
   • Dspare 6.1

     19 August 2017 at 1:15 pm

     Nope
     The advantage of the Roy Morgan is that it comes out reliably each month so is amenable to assessing long term trends. TVNZ rarely comments on the Reid research, and TV3 avoids Colmar Brunton, beacuse they’ve paid for their own and are going to squeeze what value they can from it.

     When it comes to credibility, we can look at last election where the last Roy Morgan was within margin of error for; National 46.5 predicted to 47.0 result, Labour 24 to 25, & NZF 8.0 to 8.7. Admittedly, the GP were predicted to get 13.5%, and only achieved 10.7 but that is still within two margins of error, and Reid research did even worse putting them at 14.4 (Colmar Brunton was close enough with 12%).
   • dukeofurl 6.2

     19 August 2017 at 1:30 pm

     Thats not so.

     It was just Morgan polled more often, now its every two weeks, but they polled for the full 14 days rather than a more common 3-4 days.
     So theres a methodology change.

     Since Feb of this year RM has had National at 43.5, 43, 43, 46.5, 43, 42.5

     while RM Greens numbers have been 14.5, 13,14,13.5,14,13.5 and now 9 ( that last poll was taken before CM numbers but wasnt released first)

     Whats wrong with those numbers ?
     • One Anonymous Bloke 6.2.1

       19 August 2017 at 7:28 pm

       They don’t show the Greens on 4%, and that makes Nope sad.
       • dukeofurl 6.2.1.1

         20 August 2017 at 7:17 am

         Thats because RM was polling BEFORE the One News. The Greens just declined some more in a later poll. Surely you know they are snapshots, not enduring truths ?

         Are you comparing polls taken at different times ? Sad
         • One Anonymous Bloke 6.2.1.1.1

           20 August 2017 at 8:02 am

           I didn’t compare a poll with anything other than Nope’s wishful thinking. I expect Nope will also be disappointed with Reid Research’s latest tea-leaves too.

           I think you are reading far too much into individual results.
7. Dspare 7

   19 August 2017 at 12:57 pm

   With regards to the mahi, it is good to see that Davidson is getting on with it in her role as spokeswoman on poverty:

   the longest graduated sanction applied to a working age main benefit client with dependent children was 218 days… Davidson said Government targets had nothing to do with caring for people and everything to do with getting people off benefit.

   “Families with children are being subject to these harsh sanctions. But really though, one week of having less income than what you expect, is going to have a cumulative bad impact… seven months – that’s just going to create long-term hardship. It’s going to create health hardship, debt hardship, education hardship.” …

   According to statistics from the Ministry of Social Development, in the year to June 30, 75 per cent of sanctioned clients (627) with dependent children had re-complied within four weeks.

   The number of sanctions had increased by 8.2 per cent in the past 12 months from the year prior

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/95892427/beneficiary-with-children-had-benefit-cut-by-half-for-seven-months

   So 25% of beneficiaries with dependent children were left in punitive poverty (below even the standard income that is rarely adequate to cover the essentials) longer than a month.
   • weka 7.1

     19 August 2017 at 1:53 pm

     Nice one. She is doing some outstanding work.
   • The Real Matthew 7.2

     19 August 2017 at 1:54 pm

     All the Beneficiaries have to do is play by the rules (which are not onerous) and they will have their full entitlement returned.

     That some beneficiaries choose not to do so says everything about their attitude to their own children and how little they care about the welfare of their own children.
     • weka 7.2.1

       19 August 2017 at 2:01 pm

       “All the Beneficiaries have to do is play by the rules (which are not onerous) and they will have their full entitlement returned.”

       You just made that up. Meanwhile, massive numbers of people with direct experience of the system, know that it’s not only onerous for many, it’s also prejudicial and punitive. Many beneficiaries don’t get their full entitlements due to WINZ not doing their job properly.
       • Bearded Git 7.2.1.1

         19 August 2017 at 4:27 pm

         Agree totally…that fu%#wit nevil gibson on the panel yrsterday talked about mt causing trust to be lost in the beneficiary system…..then soon afterwards was talking favourably about how nz had one of the highest per capita take ups of luxury car purchases ($200000 plus)…would love to know if gibson had ever worked for cash…paid cash…been the beneficiary of a tax scheme that was morally bankrupt.
         • Dspare 7.2.1.1.1

           19 August 2017 at 10:12 pm

           How can Turei have caused; “trust to be lost in the beneficiary system”, when there was none there to begin with (at least not this decade). It is easy to claim Work&Income tried to contact a person to arrange not at all onerous or humiliating case management. But if they’ve had their landline cut off because they couldn’t afford the bill,or are living out of a car, that is mere box ticking on paperwork rather than an active attempt to help people.

           Anyway, comment 7 should have ended thusly (the missing “sanctioned” makes it otherwise sound much worse than it already is):

           So a quarter of; sanctioned beneficiaries with dependent children, were left in punitive poverty (below even the standard income that is rarely adequate to cover the essentials) longer than a month.
     • Draco T Bastard 7.2.2

       19 August 2017 at 2:14 pm

       They were playing by the rules when they got turfed off.
     • roy cartland 7.2.3

       19 August 2017 at 2:17 pm

       “choose not to”
       What cynical and arrogant condescension. ‘Choosing’ an utterly shitty option over a quite possibly fatal one is not a ‘choice’ in any way you’d understand it.
     • One Anonymous Bloke 7.2.4

       19 August 2017 at 2:23 pm

       Yes! Because Article 22 of the UDoHR says:

       Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security so long as they can satisfy the flaccid whims of sadistic right wing scum like The Real Matthew.
       • tracey 7.2.4.1

         19 August 2017 at 3:00 pm

         Touche
     • tracey 7.2.5

       19 August 2017 at 3:00 pm

       In two paragraphs you revealled so much about yourself and how little evidence you use to form your opinions.
     • adam 7.2.6

       19 August 2017 at 3:23 pm

       I know living in a bubble is the new normal for the rwnj’s on this site. But really the real matthew, that small a bubble…
     • greywarshark 7.2.7

       19 August 2017 at 4:41 pm

       Beneficiary bashing AGAIN. I am sure you can quote a number of real cases and choose to make those the base for your dissing the whole group.

       People who don’t look after the welfare of their own children come in all classes, often from the middle and upper class. That is they pay for the physical needs of their youngsters, but don’t teach them to value others or even themselves. They may be nothing to their parents if they don’t achieve highly.

       The parents may pay for boarding schools to look after their kids but for the true welfare of their own young, they care little leaving it to private schools or the market. So their outward appearance of good parents is just a mask. They would probably care more deeply for their dogs.
     • KJT 7.2.8

       19 August 2017 at 5:24 pm

       Meanwhile. The rules even require those on the DPB to inform WINZ if a parent or friend gives them baby clothes. So their benefit can be adjusted.

       NOT Onerous.

       Even WINZ staff cannot tell you what the rules are. They are so complex.
       • WILD KATIPO 7.2.8.1

         19 August 2017 at 7:31 pm

         Bloody ridiculous, isn’t it?

         Nationals brighter future. What a load of bloody bollocks.
       • patricia bremner 7.2.8.2

         19 August 2017 at 11:05 pm

         7.2.8 KJT I agree. The real Mathew…..

         This is Victorian nonsense, based on a notion of deserving /non deserving poor.

         Workhouses can’t be far off if we don’t ditch this right wing mob.

         The right to separate parents and children, many types of sanctions are straight out Dicken’s England.

         Counting food parcels gifts and any other income keeps people poor.

         There is no pathway out of poverty. No measures to improve lives, just ways to save $$$ at the expense of the poor.

         A “job” to end poverty is so underpaid, based on insufficient hours, and often very temporary just compounds the problems.

         Illnesses suicides homelessness follow.

         So where is this magical choice.??? Sad Sad unfeeling clod!!
   • greywarshark 7.3

     19 August 2017 at 5:19 pm

     Thanks for that Dspare. Good point to have our attention drawn to –
     again and
     again and
     again
     agai
     aga
     until the drip wears down the stone, or cracks it. Will tears be able to do that, it must be due to happen soon after all these years.

     Perhaps a group should be started, to join you must have cried in WINZ. They should get a small medal for being a genuine NZ battler, along with good wishes and a voucher for a free pizza as something practical.
8. lurgee 8

   19 August 2017 at 1:33 pm

   It is worth noting this poll puts the Greens are down 4.5% on the previous RM. And Labour up 2%. So a net loss for the left bloc, and Bill whispering sweet nothings into Winston’s receptive ear.
9. Sable 9

   19 August 2017 at 1:39 pm

   Surprise, surprise….who would have guessed….LOL

   Got to be careful about taking the McMedia too seriously people…..
   • dukeofurl 9.1

     20 August 2017 at 7:14 am

     Its satire !
     The polls havent changed, this one covered a period before the One News, so the narrative was Greens down to 9% and a later period they went even further to below 5%

     Just as I thought, this attempt at ‘satire’ went over some peoples heads
10. tracey 10

    19 August 2017 at 2:58 pm

    Even in a post I suspect was somewhat mocking of polls many decide to evaluate the polls. Stop feeding the polls
11. Incognito 11

    19 August 2017 at 3:53 pm

    I’m with Stephanie Rodgers.
12. patricia bremner 12

    19 August 2017 at 6:19 pm

    The Right wouldn’t be commenting as they are if their own polling was giving them the answers they wanted.

    Must be pretty dire if they need to use all these distractions, “Look over here”

    Take a look at the other hand, full of pacifiers and lollies, but the babies are too fed up and want a change.

    Soon it will be, ” Jacinda’s nice, but is that enough??” “Can she do the sums though??” “Bill’s reliable”

    You watch …. all the old chestnuts trying to make voters uncertain again.

    Keep Left and carry on.

    Remember Bolger said “Bugger the polls!!!!!”
13. Philj 13

    19 August 2017 at 6:43 pm

    This is pasted from Open Mike. Here is more apt. Re. Polling.
    If, if and if again. There is one poll that really counts IF you are really, really, serious. If Germany had invaded England in WW2. If the AB’S had taken their own chef and food to the World Cup in South Africa in two thousand and whatever. If Barbie was an All Black! This is what I call Poll Porn. Other countries don’t permit this poll porn, for obvious reasons. Tea leaf reading anyone?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS