Open mike 12/08/2021

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, August 12th, 2021 - 81 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:

Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

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

Step up to the mike …

81 comments on “Open mike 12/08/2021 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. weka 1
    12 August 2021 at 7:46 am

    People following vaccine trials and tracking, have there been studies on long covid in vaccinated people who had acute covid post-vax?

  2. KJT 2
    12 August 2021 at 8:04 am

    No published definative trials yet. Several started.
    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/will-people-who-get-covid-post-vaccination-have-long-term-symptoms_l_60afda9be4b0ead279660672

    However promising indications so far. Including that vaccination may help with those who already have long covid.

    Long Covid symptoms ease after vaccination, survey finds | Long Covid | The Guardian

    • weka 2.1
      12 August 2021 at 9:36 am

      Thanks KJT. So the gist is that the numbers of people getting covid post-vaccine are small at .01%, and they don't have much data on long covid post-vaccine yet.

      Based on the CDC’s preliminary data from April, about 30% of vaccine breakthrough infections were totally asymptomatic. An estimated 10% of people with breakthrough cases were hospitalized and 2% died, but it’s crucial to note that a decent portion of those hospitalizations and deaths were unrelated to COVID-19.

      hmm, 10% and 2% isn't insignificant. 'Unrelated to covid' is really unclear especially given the low numbers.

      • McFlock 2.1.1
        12 August 2021 at 3:23 pm

        160 is a manageable number to assess individual causes of death with regards to whether covid played a part. Especially when the median age of death is 82.

        • weka 2.1.1.1
          13 August 2021 at 1:39 am

          I don't know what that means.

          • McFlock 2.1.1.1.1
            13 August 2021 at 2:35 am

            ok.

            If there are 160,000 deaths, doing a study like this relies on administrative data. Many people won't have had coronial examinations, it'll basically be the death administrative data cross referenced with test result dataand maybe a cross reference with computerised hospital records. At best. The most timely data will be something like "died after a positive covid test, or with a postmortem positive covid test". Hence some denialists place weight on the term "died with covid" rather than "from covid", their theory being that I might be asymptomatic with covid and get hit by a bus, examiner draws blood and I "died with positive covid test". That doesn't explain why a hundred and sixty thousand people were suddenly hit by busses, but plague denialists don't have much to cling to.

            But with 160 deaths, it's feasible for a small team doing the research to actually review each death and say "oh, that dude was hit by a bus, death not related to covid". Or confirm that the late-stage cancer was the reason the patient was admitted, and they were actually asymptomatic in hospital despite the positive test on admission and 'twas the cancer that got 'em.

            to put it another way:

            Each death would get a local area review (death cert, maybe hospital case review committee, maybe a referral to a coronial inquiry, that sort of thing) but they'd be putting in forms as well as detailed case notes, by and large. That form data gets coded into a system, and someone else looking for e.g. covid deaths might get 160k deaths with "covid" flagged in the contributing causes of death.

            But with deaths measured in the dozens, a research committee with appropriate authority might be able to actually review the case notes to get a better idea of the case. That can be as useful as the form data, because although it's more work, it's a finer-toothed comb.

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 2.1.2
        12 August 2021 at 4:07 pm

        Some fully-vaccinated people with breakthrough infections do actually die of Covid of course. The vaccines vastly reduce your risk, but not to zero. A few people are still unlucky.

        Fully-vaccinated people who die of Covid tend to be the most vulnerable (elderly, underlying conditions – e.g. Massachusetts coronavirus breakthrough deaths: 73% had underlying conditions, median age was 82.5 ) – and vaccines work less well in the very elderly due to reduced capacity to mount an immune response.

        This was a useful insight:

        “Someone aged 80 who is fully vaccinated essentially takes on the risk of an unvaccinated person of around 50 – much lower, but still not nothing, "

  3. Ad 3
    12 August 2021 at 8:34 am

    Big shoutout to President Biden but in particular to Senator Bernie Sanders who actually formed the blueprint for this massive infrastructure bill that has gone through the Senate. This is Bernie's own statement on it here:

    https://www.sanders.senate.gov/press-releases/news-senate-budget-chairman-sanders-and-majority-leader-schumer-introduce-historic-budget-resolution/

    Of course the commentators can see shadows in why the group of 18 Republican Senators supported it:

    https://www.salon.com/2021/08/11/the-ominous-reason-why-republican-opposition-to-bidens-infrastructure-spending-crumbled/

    But the number of longstanding Democrat programmes that have been funded in this is pretty spectacular, for US politics.

  4. Treetop 4
    12 August 2021 at 9:31 am

    I was not expecting to reschedule having my Covid vaccination. Both vaccination dates need to be booked at the same booking on the 0800 28 29 26. I want an 8 week gap. I was surprised to be told that the booking system could not give me a date 8 weeks from early September (date of the first jab) for the second jab. I will need to cancel the second date as only a month gap.

    • weka 4.1
      12 August 2021 at 9:33 am

      what happens if you can't make the second appointment?

      • Treetop 4.1.1
        12 August 2021 at 9:41 am

        I did not ask.

        I could not use the second booked date for the first jab either with the initial booking.

        • weka 4.1.1.1
          12 August 2021 at 10:02 am

          I'm curious now how easy they make it to get the second jab if you have to cancel the appointment.

          • Treetop 4.1.1.1.1
            12 August 2021 at 10:20 am

            A second appointment is given but only a 4 week gap. If a 8 week gap is wanted then the second date will need to be cancelled as the booking system is only loaded until early October.

            Sometimes there are a few weeks to wait for the first appointment. There was talk earlier in the week of having a 8 week gap.

            • Andre 4.1.1.1.1.1
              12 August 2021 at 11:00 am

              Maybe try again today to get that eight-week-gap booking. The ground has shifted.

              People who had already been fully vaccinated with doses less than six weeks apart were still protected from the virus, while those who have their second vaccination booked fewer than six weeks after their first could change their booking.

              https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/126047313/covid19-everyone-eligible-for-vaccine-from-september-1-sixweek-gap-between-doses

              I booked online and had no problems with getting my first booking for 18th August and second booking 29th Septmeber for a six-week gap.

              • Treetop …
                12 August 2021 at 2:37 pm

                I rang at 8.30 am this morning to cancel for this Saturday.

                I will go to the first jab and then rebook for the second one. I see a specialist mid September as I have mast cell and systemic scleroderma and want to make sure my system coped with the first jab. I have not been myself for a couple weeks.

              • Bearded Git …
                12 August 2021 at 2:58 pm

                I had my first jab yesterday then tried to change the date of my second jab (booked online at the same time as the first) but it was impossible.

                So I booked a second jab (with a 10 week gap) and emailed them to cancel the other second jab.

              • Forget now …
                12 August 2021 at 3:22 pm

                I was already planning on a 12 week gap myself (having read some of the research on which the interdose interval increase is based). But still no bookings available for October. So I have just canceled my 3week repeat jab and put a reminder in late September to make the booking then. I guess I should change that reminder to earlier in the month now.

                That said – if there is a community transmitted outbreak, I will likely be going for an early jab. Though (to grossly simplify), if the Pfizer is; 60% effective on first dose, up to 90% after 3weeks, or 95% after 3months; then it would make more sense for more people to have more first doses, than to topup the half vaccinated.

                Still, the PITCH studies medical population may not be that generalizable to Aotearoa. And in others there may be confounding of interdose and postdose periods.

    • bwaghorn 4.2
      12 August 2021 at 1:10 pm

      Mate just get your 2 how ever it works ,we going to be getting a 3rd jab I reckon and probably 1 every year after.

      • Treetop 4.2.1
        12 August 2021 at 2:39 pm

        It is the anticipation, usually I do not give anything medical much thought.

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 4.2.2
        12 August 2021 at 4:13 pm

        Yes, it is a balance of risk.

        Somewhat stronger immune response with a longer gap, but if the delta variant enters NZ, you need to get your second jab then wait 2+ weeks for full immunity to develop…hopefully you get there before you encounter actual Covid!

        A 3 week gap still gives a very good result, just not absolutely optimum.

  5. weka 5
    12 August 2021 at 10:04 am

    The people who decided to co-opt the identical binary vocabulary used forever to refer to sex to also refer to "gender" created this problem, and they can solve it any time they like by coining new terms and pronouns for people who want to be referred to by gender not sex

    From twitter

    Seems a useful solution all things considered.

    The reasons why that might not work, as far as I can tell, are that some people want to smash the binary, others want sex to become a social construct alone, and some people have dysphoria and need their chosen gender ID to be affirmed by those around them all the time.

    All of that should be debated in open society so that we get a say in what is a major and fundamental changing of English language usage. I’m not a fan of allowing people with mental health issues (dysphoria) to have such a degree of control as this without everyone getting time and space to think about what it means.

    The smash the binary crowd need to front up and explain the value and let that be debated alongside those who believe the binary has some uses.

    • Forget now 5.1
      12 August 2021 at 12:03 pm

      Did we get a chance to debate the change in language where; "literally", now literally means both; figuratively and literally (literal antonyms)? Inflammable and flammable being synonyms? Second person plural (/formal) used in place of second person singular (e.g. "You" in place of "Thou")?

      English is a hodge-podge of different languages and times, and in any case is being replaced by American as the lingua franca (at least there's not still gendering of words to remember like the original French tongue). For example; "colour" gets red-marked by TS spell checker, while "color" is let through without question. Conveying meaning is more important than lexiconic accuracy, despite one's aesthetic preferences.

      Anyway; there already are NB neo-pronouns that are very seldom used – because of the hassle in explaining them every time they are; except in rare trans-only gatherings where there might be a reasonable expectation of being understood. Mx in place of; Mr or Ms; Xe/ Xem/ Xyr in place of; They/ Them/ Their. Maybe that will change in the future, but it seems unlikely that spoken language (in a multitude of dialects) will take much notice of an academic debate about ideal pronoun usage in an ideal world. I do like; E/Em/ Eir, because that is close to what NZ people often sound like to my ear, when they are speaking naturally, though that isn't in common usage.

      • Nic the NZer 5.1.1
        12 August 2021 at 12:40 pm

        You can change the language setting to UK or NZ English when you tire of your spell checker.

        • Forget now 5.1.1.1
          12 August 2021 at 2:53 pm

          I sometimes change language in word processors, but most of the time I acknowledge that default English is US English, so I had better learn to use it that way. I wish I could remember how to use macrons for te Reo Maori though (on mobile now, so not even going to try!).

          • Nic the NZer 5.1.1.1.1
            12 August 2021 at 3:22 pm

            I have worked in environments where UK or US english spelling is a shared standard, so I sometimes have needed to recognise the differences.

            The maori macrons I find a little funny at present, due to stuff self declaring they are historically racist, and now using macrons in their headline spelling without correcting the generated urls (e.g get it programmed to sub out the macron a for a regular a in the headlined link). Its just a but funny that they have said they really care but in practice they don't bother with following through.

  6. WeTheBleeple 6
    12 August 2021 at 10:09 am

    Down With Farmer Bashing Nonsense.

    We've all heard (at least in the NZ version of events) about how cows and farmers are to blame for climate change and that's simply not true. For oil and agricultural giants to shift blame onto (mostly) hard working farmers is scummy behaviour indeed. These same people have also shifted the onus onto you, the consumer, as if you recycling and eating tofu is going to cut it. Meanwhile they continue to drill, dig and gaslight our planet.

    Don't get me wrong, every bit of pollution reduction helps at this stage of the game, we should all be decreasing our consumption. But agricultural giants are still destroying rainforest to bring you soy for your latte, while many local farmers have joined the fight against climate change and environmental degradation.

    As a wiser person than me once said: It's not the cow, it's the how.

    Ruminant animals are an integral part of Savannah, Grasslands, Plains and Prairie biomes. They naturally mob together to avoid predators and through this graze and trample down grasses and forbes in one area. Then, due to lack of feed, they move. This is nature, nature practising rotational grazing.

    The cows/bison/wildebeest/add grazers and browsers here… pass and the plants and microbes get to work. The plant wants to rebuild and so it sends carbon in the form of simple sugars down to the root system where it is consumed by bacteria and fungi in exchange for other nutrients. The soil biota sequester large amounts of carbon (raising soil fertility in the form of humus and food web nutrient cycling) as the plant rebuilds above ground.

    The litter left on the ground is food for insects and microbes. Grinders and shredders break it down as microbes and fungi colonise surfaces – this in turn attracts worms, some that work in the litter, some that drag organic matter down into the soil. The soil gets enriched and aerated.

    Roots get deeper and deeper, biodiversity increases leading to better overall growth through shifting seasons. Ground cover increases leading to some protection from drought. Water infiltration increases leading to some protection from flood.

    Another wise person said of all this: It is not man, but management.

    The closer we get to understanding and imitating natural cycles the less work we need to do to get a product. As added bonuses we increase both fertility and resilience on our farms.

    Trees are also an integral part of agro-eco systems, but that's another post.

    While some of our farmers have chosen climate denial and blaming Labour for their difficulties, many others are leading the charge in creating eco-conscious systems that will help us not only survive, but thrive into the future.

    If you're looking for targets to vent your spleen at, leave farmers alone unless they're dirty bastards like those running feedlots.

    It's not the cow, it's the how.

    • weka 6.2
      12 August 2021 at 10:15 am

      spot on WtB. How would you feel about me putting that up as a Guest Post?

      • WeTheBleeple 6.2.1
        12 August 2021 at 10:27 am

        OK, but check my language please in case I've missed something a bit crude. I still tend to swear like a sailor where other words would suffice. Like the 2nd to last paragraph – if you could change bastards to practitioners… wink

        Also, may as well use my name. I’m DB Brown. Pleased to meet ya.

    • Poission 6.3
      12 August 2021 at 10:19 am

      Ruminant animals are an integral part of Savannah, Grasslands, Plains and Prairie biomes. They naturally mob together to avoid predators and through this graze and trample down grasses and forbes in one area. Then, due to lack of feed, they move. This is nature, nature practising rotational grazing.

      The Coevolution of grasses and grazers led to cenzoic cooling.

      Grasslands have long been considered products
      of the coevolution of grasses and grazers (Koval-
      evsky 1873). Few plants other than grasses can
      withstand the high-crowned, enamel-edged teeth
      and hard hooves of antelope and horses. Yet these
      same animals are best suited to the abrasive gritty
      opal phytoliths and dust of flat, open grasslands.
      Grasses recover readily from fire and nurture large
      herbivores such as elephants: both fire and ele-
      phants promote grassland at the expense of wood-
      land

      https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.uoregon.edu/dist/d/3735/files/2013/07/grasslandscooling-ni1ucb.pdf

    • joe90 6.4
      12 August 2021 at 12:26 pm

      Wondering how much of present day's associated livestock are ruminants.

      Comparison of current global biomass with prehuman values (which are very difficult to estimate accurately) demonstrates the impact of humans on the biosphere. Human activity contributed to the Quaternary Megafauna Extinction between ≈50,000 and ≈3,000 y ago, which claimed around half of the large (>40 kg) land mammal species (30). The biomass of wild land mammals before this period of extinction was estimated by Barnosky (30) at ≈0.02 Gt C. The present-day biomass of wild land mammals is approximately sevenfold lower, at ≈0.003 Gt C (SI Appendix, Pre-human Biomass and Chordates and Table S11). Intense whaling and exploitation of other marine mammals have resulted in an approximately fivefold decrease in marine mammal global biomass [from ≈0.02 Gt C to ≈0.004 Gt C (31)]. While the total biomass of wild mammals (both marine and terrestrial) decreased by a factor of ≈6, the total mass of mammals increased approximately fourfold from ≈0.04 Gt C to ≈0.17 Gt C due to the vast increase of the biomass of humanity and its associated livestock. Human activity has also impacted global vertebrate stocks, with a decrease of ≈0.1 Gt C in total fish biomass, an amount similar to the remaining total biomass in fisheries and to the gain in the total mammalian biomass due to livestock husbandry (SI Appendix, Pre-human Biomass).

      The impact of human civilization on global biomass has not been limited to mammals but has also profoundly reshaped the total quantity of carbon sequestered by plants. A worldwide census of the total number of trees (32), as well as a comparison of actual and potential plant biomass (17), has suggested that the total plant biomass (and, by proxy, the total biomass on Earth) has declined approximately twofold relative to its value before the start of human civilization. The total biomass of crops cultivated by humans is estimated at ≈10 Gt C, which accounts for only ≈2% of the extant total plant biomass (17).

      https://www.pnas.org/content/115/25/6506

      • WeTheBleeple 6.4.1
        12 August 2021 at 1:21 pm

        Not sure exactly what's being asked. Could you rephrase the question?

        Historically vast herds were part and parcel of grass dominated biomes – it would be interesting to know if the reduction in wild animals biomass is similar or dwarfed by the mass of todays domesticated animals. But we may underestimate historic populations significantly. I always take studies like this with a grain of salt (makes the meat tastier).

        NZ had enormous numbers of seabirds redistributing oceanic nutrients onto land, enhancing terrestrial biomes which would have, in turn, enriched estuarine and wetland systems. Fish migration inland is also a considerable source of terrestrial inputs, and many New Zealand species are anadromous.

        The paper Poisson dropped above suggests carbon from grassy biomes gets sequestered long-term via erosion depositing carbon rich soils in wetlands and estuarine systems. Wetland (and estuarine) restoration takes on new significance in this light: on top of nutrient cycling, habitat, biodiversity, productivity, aquifer replenishment, etc, we have long term carbon sequestration. One can't produce soil indefinitely, however, unless you have phenomenon like enormous numbers of birds redistributing nutrients – replenishing losses from weathering processes.

        • joe90 6.4.1.1
          12 August 2021 at 3:56 pm

          Sorry, poorly phrased.

          Whether ruminants in the associated livestock bio mass would match or exceed the extinct, wild ruminant bio mass.

          • WeTheBleeple 6.4.1.1.1
            12 August 2021 at 7:58 pm

            My masters study was of the evolution of large mammals. Suffice it to say numbers were advantageous to adaptive ability. But historic range sizes (proxy for population size) had been greatly reduced for hundreds of species in the study, as mans presence encroached.

            It looks like we're both curious as to answering the same question regarding historic wild vs current domestic biomass. My old professor might know, I'll ask him.

            • WeTheBleeple 6.4.1.1.1.1
              12 August 2021 at 9:14 pm

              I'll just add to my notes above re: redistribution of nutrients. Seaweed farming and usage on land might at least partially replace historic bird and fish numbers transferring sea nutrients to land.

    • Bearded Git 6.5
      12 August 2021 at 3:01 pm

      It is the intensity of the farming that is the problem. Southland is not the Savannah or the Prairies.

      David Parker was excellent on the farm pollution issue on Morning Report (RNZ) today.

      • WeTheBleeple 6.5.1
        12 August 2021 at 7:49 pm

        Absolutely, BG. Intensity has been able to be increased via pouring on nitrates. But, with regulations in place/being put in place this practise should, at least theoretically, stop. Fonterra seems to be big on PR and rubbish on halting non-compliance. Perhaps some of our ire might be delivered to their doorstep.

        When one decreases farm inputs (like nitrate), it may indeed decrease overall output. However, this also has decreased costs. Not just in reduced fertiliser bills, but also vets bills, better PR, better animal health… E.g. rye staggers (ergot) love high nitrates and overgrazing; while mixed pastures with legumes, timed grazing and leaving residue all factor in to decreasing staggers. When accounting for all factors, farmers may find they're better off in many ways, including what's left in the pocket.

        While greatly simplified, a farm ecosystem is still an ecosystem, and will respond to eco-conscious management.

        I don't listen to any radio, but feel free to share points you thought worth highlighting.

  7. Sabine 7
    12 August 2021 at 10:16 am

    And maybe we can also stop blaming people for not getting a vaccine they actually can't get.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2021/08/coronavirus-health-officials-quietly-change-vaccine-availability-for-port-workers-following-tauranga-delta-scare.html

    Health officials have quietly made changes to COVID-19 vaccine availability for port workers amid the Delta variant scare in Tauranga.

    Until now, only workers interacting with ships and crew were entitled to a vaccine – just a fraction of the workforce at the ports.

    Charles Finny, who is the independent chair of the Port Company CEO Group, says they've been trying to change the rules to allow all workers to get the jab.

    "We've been arguing for that for months," he says.

    But suddenly, amid the Tauranga COVID-19 scare, a change was made after port CEOs met with Director-General of Health Dr Ashley Bloomfield on Tuesday.

    "We were told yesterday and Dr Bloomfield agreed with us that that didn't make much sense," Finny says.

    "There was definitely frustration and we're very pleased that we have got the rules changed."

    The Government's messaging so far, even from Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern on Wednesday, had been that vaccines were always available for port workers.

    COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins said on Wednesday it wasn’t possible to do it earlier due to vaccine supply issues.

    just vaccinate all those that want it – and we currently have a million bookings so it is not as if people don't try to get it, and once everyone willing has had their jabs, complain about those that still don't come forward.

  8. Muttonbird 8
    12 August 2021 at 10:28 am

    Oh, yes. Is that just a ban on me using that term, or an outright ban for everyone.

    I must say either way it doesn't say much for your position on free speech.

    I use it as an antidote to your prolific use of the equally racist hate term, "woke". Will you be banning that word also?

    Do doubt y’all will be arguing about this in the back end. Have fun!

    [we actually have better things to be doing, although notes do get made in the back end so we can track patterns of behaviour. I will note that your comments here are an intentional flaming of a TS Author, and that will get moderator attention too. I disagree with RL on a number of things, but you seem to think you can behave how you like and stir up shit at will, and that disrespects the work we all do.

    I’m getting sick of people here who should know better and still can’t or won’t differentiate between arguing the politics vs having a go at individuals, and who just end up creating more work for authors and moderators and making the place harder to be in. Ball is in your court. – weka]

    [TheStandard: A moderator moved this comment to Open Mike as being off topic or irrelevant in the post it was made in. Be more careful in future.]

  9. Andre 9
    12 August 2021 at 10:53 am

    To my taste, the border opening proposals are too loose too soon.

    Allowing things like vaccinated travelers to come back and isolate at home before everyone that wants the vaccine has had it is too much risk of infecting some that want it but genuinely haven't had reasonable opportunity.

    To my taste, it's also too much risk of creating a local outbreak that will require a level 3 or level 4 lockdown to contain. That's too much risk of seriously disrupting people's lives for too little reward in allowing just a privileged few some more privilege.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300380835/covid-19-nz-resets-approach-with-faster-vaccine-rollout-border-reopening-trial-this-year

  10. Forget now 10
    12 August 2021 at 12:27 pm

    The ODT says Waipori fund is up $6 million this year, so if anyone is having trouble with electricity bills in Dunedin then that may be something worth accessing. I thought there was a 2 year stand-down, but apparently it is only a year (officially) – so I might be getting on with that next power bill myself. Problem is that you have to go down and deal with Christian social-services, who aren't always the most cooperative with non-Christians &/or gender diverse people.

    The fund, after distributions, grew from $94 million to $100 million in the past year.

    https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/waipori-fund-grows-100-million

    This fund helps to address fuel poverty in the city, providing much needed support for people and whānau struggling to pay their electric bills. Annually around 600 people / whānau are assisted. The fund is managed on the DCC's behalf by the Dunedin Budget Advisory Service, and administered by this service, along with Family Works – Presbyterian Support, Catholic Social Services, and the Salvation Army.

    https://www.dunedin.govt.nz/services/funding-and-grants/electricity-fund/electricity-and-healthy-homes-grants

    I have not dealt with the DBAS before (Community House 283-301 Moray Place – so on bushub corner?), but at least they seem nonreligious. The Catholics (and Anglican family support for different things) were pretty grudging in their aid last time I applied through them.

  11. alwyn 11
    12 August 2021 at 1:36 pm

    I have seen that Micky Savage has in the past commented on "leaked" UMR polls.

    Does he have anything to say on this latest little snippet on the subject. Regarding the subject I have seen tweets that claim that UMR’s latest poll is supposed to have Labour at 38%, National at 31%, ACT 13% and the Greens at 8%. It sounds to be a quite likely result but I'm sure that Micky has sources much closer to the source of this than I do.

    This would certainly be giving the backbenchers in Labour the shakes if they are allowed to see it.

    https://twitter.com/Coltheman1/status/1425374215151124486

    • Bearded Git 11.1
      12 August 2021 at 3:06 pm

      Even if that poll is true it would still elect a Lab/Green/MP government with 63 seats.

      • Alan 11.1.1
        12 August 2021 at 5:51 pm

        but a trend is emerging that suggests that may not be the case in the future

        • McFlock 11.1.1.1
          12 August 2021 at 6:04 pm

          If these trends continue, there's probably only another couple of terms left in the govt…

          lol

          • Alan 11.1.1.1.1
            12 August 2021 at 6:17 pm

            you keep thinking that

            • McFlock 11.1.1.1.1.1
              12 August 2021 at 6:43 pm

              Mate, I'm not the one basing their optimism on reports from a guy whose claim to fame is turning magazines and books around so some low-waged person has to reorganise them later.

              • Alan …
                12 August 2021 at 7:18 pm

                labour had an absolute majority on election night, that was not very long ago. UMR is not the only poll showing the trend.

                • McFlock …
                  12 August 2021 at 8:46 pm

                  Let's look at that, shall we?

                  Firstly, no poll has had National on 30% since the election. The polls immediately before the election had nations at 31, but were off by 5% or so. Either way, the last few polls have had national stuck at sub-30 with little to no improvement.

                  Labour is indeed trending down, and 38% isn't completely out of the question. But again, the polls undercounted Labour by 5% just prior to the actual election result, so meh.

                  But what of their friends? The Greens are steady at 10%, usually a couple of percent either side. They polled at the lower end of that bound in 2020.

                  ACT are interesting, increasing support in the last few polls where national has remained steady. The supposed "leak" has no movement for them, while national increases: the opposite of the more recent observations.

                  Now, maybe nact is trailing labgrn by 2%. Weirder things have happened in NZ politics. But that would mean that "coltheman" is the one with the inside scoop on this, then the nats are less competent than that moron. Which puts their 31% down to luck rather than ability. Now, advancement by luck rather than merit is on brand for a corporate-capitalist shill like nact, but it's not sustainable in the long run.

    • Red Blooded One 11.2
      12 August 2021 at 3:07 pm

      Perhaps the nutjob Coltheman who used to go around turning over magazines with the face of Jacinda on is simply "leaking" numbers out of his arse, If you count him as a reliable source, more twit you.

      • WeTheBleeple 11.2.1
        12 August 2021 at 3:22 pm

        These folks who make hate a full time job are everywhere. On the one hand they claim the Govt is useless because all their problems haven't been solved by whinging and attacking others. On the other they back parties who want to reduce government oversight – which would make it less than useless.

        Not a mensa contender to be seen or heard.

    • joe90 11.3
      12 August 2021 at 3:50 pm

      Desperation…

    • McFlock 11.4
      12 August 2021 at 3:54 pm

      lol

      If that book-bturner has better contacts in the PM's office than all the parliamentary press corps and the opposition combined, no fucking way Judith has the nats up to 31%.

    • Anne 11.5
      12 August 2021 at 4:46 pm

      UMR does polling for private companies. They pay for the privilege of having their own polling tailored to their specific needs. Its not surprising therefore the results get leaked on a regular basis and there's no guarantee they are correct. There have been instances in the past when the leaks were wrong.

      In the case of the philistine, Coltheman his words "my contact in the Prime Minister's Office" is a dead giveaway he's lying through his teeth. The PM’s Office is highly unlikely to be on UMR’s list of recipients.

      • Incognito 11.5.1
        12 August 2021 at 4:58 pm

        You do know who he is, don’t you? A fragile man with a fragile ego (yeah, that’s a tautology) who loves to turn over magazines with Ardern’s face on the cover. Just the kind of guy who Alwyn would take seriously, of course.

        • Anne 11.5.1.1
          12 August 2021 at 5:10 pm

          Yes. RBO @ 11.2 reminded me. I don't know about the fragile bit, but an 'uncultured' man he certainly is.

        • alwyn 11.5.1.2
          14 August 2021 at 12:35 pm

          Is that an example of not trying to answer the argument being made you simply insult the commenter?

          • Incognito 11.5.1.2.1
            14 August 2021 at 1:20 pm

            If the shoe fits, Alwyn. Anyway, my comment was to Anne about Coltheman.

            FYI, I don’t actually have a problem with that so-called ‘leaked poll’, as it is seems not too far off from some others. I do have a problem, however, with the imbecilic way it was shared: first by a fragile twat on Twitter and second by you here on TS. As such, there was no reason to answer any argument by a commenter because it was a series of dick moves that simply looked like trolling. Do you think we’re stupid here to play into your silly little games?

  12. Alan 12
    12 August 2021 at 2:10 pm

    interesting

  13. RP Mcmurphy 13
    12 August 2021 at 2:52 pm

    well if you read the right wing franchised rags around the country printing rubbish from the likes of Audrey Young and Richarfd preeble EVERY DAY then it is no wonder . some of the left wing theoreticians who inhabit this sphere should get down and dirty and start writing to their local dailies instead of trying to score points off each other here!

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.