Political Poll on Sunday

I got a phone call yesterday asking for 8 minutes of my time. Being a helpful person I agreed to it and noted the kind of questions I was being asked.

I soon realised that it must have been paid for by either The Greens or Labour or was one on behalf of both. I was only asked what I thought about two political parties on one question as they didn’t give me any other options. I was asked what I thought about the Greens and then about Labour.

I was also asked about Andrew Little and about John Key. I was given a number of opportunities to say bad things about John Key which I declined to do. I was not asked to expand why I rated Key highly. However, when I rated Andrew Little at zero I was asked why I had scored him so poorly.

I told them because of his Angry Andrew yelling in parliament which is not Leader like behaviour.

Then I was asked about Climate change. I selected the option that it was a natural phenomenon. The next question then wanted to rate how effective the government was at dealing with it. I said there is no problem so why should they be dealing with it? ( of course that point of view was not an option that I could select )

They also had a problem with Sky City and wanted me to select negative options. I pointed out that the questions were rigged and biased as it was not possible to choose a positive response. I was given two negative responses to choose from only, on one question about Sky City.

I really don’t understand why they waste their money on polls if they do not want to obtain credible data from them.

John Key uses polls to his advantage because I believe he finds out what people really think and then makes some of his decisions accordingly. This poll however will be of no use to those who paid for it as they had an agenda before they even got the results. They are looking for a reason to attack the government for climate change. They have it in for the Sky City Convention Centre and Sky City itself and they are trying to find the ‘ evidence ‘ they need to support their stance rather than forming their stance from what the voters actually want or think.

They are also desperately looking for evidence that John Key’s star is fading and that people are no longer supportive of him.

The best question was when they asked me what I thought was the most important issue of 2014. My answer was not on the list so the guy had to go check with his supervisor.

I said that in 2014 an ethical line had been crossed by the media and that because of that no one’s privacy will ever be safe. Hacking has been legitimised by the Media so that none of us can ever feel secure again.

It is the one thing that the haters have forgotten in their feeding frenzy to ‘ get ‘ John Key, The National Party and Whaleoil. Pandora’s box has been opened and now everyone is fair game. By not protecting Cameron’s rights they have not protected their own rights. The razor cuts both ways.

post-364799-0-14742000-1345205066

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Allyson

    I recently dined with two ex Labour supporters (both female), Neither will change back to Labour with the angry Little man in charge. I think your answer on his question is bang on the money.

    • Whitey

      This could get interesting. Previously, Labour has had more support from women than men, but if it turns out that Angry Andy puts women off they may lose those votes.

    • spanishbride

      I forgot to mention that the guy said that they particularly wanted to poll the Woman of the household as they particularly wanted her opinion. So they do want to know how women feel about Angry Andrew.

      • TonyM

        Ha… they specifically wanted the man of the house when speaking to me

      • I would of loved to listen in when they got the demographics information. “What is your occupation?” “Write for a political blog” is i’m sure not an option on their list.

        • spanishbride

          He said Black Ops honey trap was not on the list ;)

    • Dave

      Well said. From a serious observer of human behaviour, i think you are spot on. Angry Andy will I believe alienate a lot of female voters, as:

      1) he is verbally aggressive and always angry
      2) He is single and is so for a reason, most can see through his selfishness and his self obsessed personality
      3) He lacks real respect for females, it is in his persona.
      4) He is an authoritative person, a dictator.

      Might have missed a few, but really interested in the comments of others, about him as a person and not necessarily his politics.

      • Sagacious Blonde

        Stuff article on 22nd November has a wife, Leigh Fitzgerald, who he has been with since 1998 and married in 2008, and a 13 yo son. He’s also got a twin sister.

      • Captain Darling

        2) no he’s definitely married, saw his trouble and strife on the telly. She looked a bit angry too.

  • Justsayn

    National and Labour / Green poll for two completely different reasons, and your experience is a good example.

    The Nats want to know what you think so that they can tailor their approach to that. Hence they ask sensible questions. Re-active, poll driven, expedient? Maybe so. Effective? Undoubtedly. Democratic? Definately.

    The Greens / Labour simply want to be able to spout a statistic to confirm what they already think is a view that ought to be shared by the masses if only the masses were not so ignorant of the truth. Hence they ask question designed to tell us what to think and to tell them they are right. Effective? No. Arrogant? Definately.

    • In Vino Veritas

      No Justsayn, GreensLabour don’t want to be able to “spout a statistic to confirm what they already think is a poplular view”, they want to make their view a popular view. They will divvy it into age groups and say things like “young people are very concerned about climate change”. The fact that they have been indoctrinated at school for 10 years won’t come into it. LabourGreens will be attempting to stymie debate (or have themselves perceived as the only disseminator of accurate information) on climate change for instance, to stop young people from changing their minds as they get older.

  • R&BAvenger

    Yes the whole Dirty Politics ‘meme’ is not getting a rest and I do hope that some salvos can be fired back soon from this quarter. In fact it’s a complete contrast with the dignity with which the genuinely slighted have acted in this whole business, and that of the MSM and the parties behind the whole matter are conducting themselves.
    Apart from the book and obvious campaign links (Love NZ, Vote Positive) there was also the concerted and obvious organised defacing of National party candidate’s billboards nationwide that just reinforced to everyone (apart from the ones who hatched the plan) that this was one huge political hit from left-wing political parties, along with a large foreign crook, to unseat the current government.
    Sure politics is dirty and campaigns can be brutal, but this was a new level of dirt. The problem was they confused desperation with ‘wanting’ it more. Relying on throwing muck and destroying people instead of well thought out, reasoned, articulated and sensible policies was dumb. Dumb and dumber.

  • JustanObserver

    “By not protecting Cameron’s rights they have not protected their own rights. The razor cuts both ways.”
    .
    SB, nice an insightful brief of your ‘comedy-poll’, however I feel you have stated a ‘right’ view of the ‘Art of War’ … ie, fight fair.
    .
    The Left-ists are the only holders of a Razor, and there is no way they will cut their own.

  • peterwn

    Pity SB had not recorded the poll conversation – it would have gone viral here. Unfortunately few people would have a recording device ‘at the ready’ on their phones (unlike TVNZ journos did years ago to catch out Rob Muldoon).

    • Time For Accountability

      Ambrose has a spare device.

      • nope, he left it somewhere else . . .

  • fergus

    Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.

    George Bernard Shaw

    Advice for the greens?

  • Coffee Connoisseur

    “I told them because of his Angry Andrew yelling in parliament which is not Leader like behaviour”

    Really? I think its long overdue for politicians to get angry. The are supposed to represent us are they not. And as much of what happens in the Beehive makes me angry then its stands to reason that those supposed to represent us should get Angry.

    Whats our countries debt now up to?

    Why is it fine for banks to create money out of nothing?

    Why is it that sovereign nations govts that can create money instead go to the banking cartels to have to plunge our country further into debt and place that debt burden on current and future generations?

    Why is it that if Govt wants to print its own money thats simply silly,poor management, and is inflationary, yet when banks create money every single day its not?!

    Why is it that we support a foreign nation whos very foreign policies for the past 50 or more years have served to create extremism and foster terrorism in countries where they have helped overthrow democratically elected governments, then installed dictators who have tortured and suppressed their own populace. Then this country that we support has taken away the rights of their own people in the name of defending against the very terrorism they have essentially created.
    Why are my rights now being affected as a result.
    My grandfathers fought in World War II to ensure that we could continue to have the freedoms we had in this country of ours.

    There is plenty to be angry about and for politicians supposedly representing New Zealanders in the corridors of power, someone getting angry is long overdue.

    Having said that I didn’t see anger. I didn’t see rage. All I saw was passion from someone who thus far appears to be a straight shooter and that is exactly what our parliament needs!

    • fergus

      Oh dear…..excrement in your cornflakes this morning?
      This problem will go away if you stop talking while you are eating.

    • Whitey

      Getting angry is not a good way to achieve constructive solutions. If someone can’t make their point in a reasonable way, they generally don’t have a reasonable point to make.

      • Coffee Connoisseur

        Anybody can become angry – that is easy, but to be angry with the right person and to the right degree and at the right time and for the right purpose, and in the right way – that is not within everybody’s power and is not easy.

        Aristotle

    • El Diablo

      Whats our countries debt now up to?
      A lot less than if labour had been in charge the last 7 years.

      Why is it fine for banks to create money out of nothing?

      It was you green party pals that wanted the reserve bank to do quantitative easing (ie. printing money) not the National Government.

      Why is it that sovereign nations govts that can create money instead go to the banking cartels to have to plunge our country further into debt and place that debt burden on current and future generations?

      No government can create money. They can only spend it. Creating money out of thin air simply reduces the value of every dollar in circulation which will have the exact same effect of putting us deeper into debt.

      Why is it that if Govt wants to print its own money thats simply silly,poor management, and is inflationary, yet when banks create money every single day its not?!

      I can’t even understand what you’re on about. Sounds like you are contradicting yourself now. Banks can’t create money, aside from the reserve bank which is a very different entity from a normal bank. Sounds like you need some basic economic education.

      Why is it that we support a foreign nation whos very foreign policies for the past 50 or more years have served to create extremism….blah blah

      Predictable American bashing. America is far from perfect and has made mistakes but has largely been a force for good – democracy, freedom, human rights. Your friends the extremists are bad buggers and giving them hugs and cuddles was never going to work.

      My grandfathers fought in World War II to ensure that we could continue to have the freedoms we had in this country of ours.

      You can thank the US that we have these freedoms. They have provided a defensive umbrella over the last 60 years that the Western world has thrived under. As America is a declining power your grandkids may not enjoy the same freedom. They may look back in envy at the halcyon days when the US was the lone superpower.

      • Coffee Connoisseur

        Whats our countries debt now up to?
        A lot less than if labour had been in charge the last 7 years.

        Perhaps but that is not really the point. People really need to stop looking at this as a left vs right issue. It isn’t. Its a future of New Zealand issue. .

        Why is it fine for banks to create money out of nothing?

        It was you green party pals that wanted the reserve bank to do quantitative easing (ie. printing money) not the National Government.

        Still doesn’t address the question does it.

        Again why is it ok for banks to create money and add it to the money supply every single day of the week but for the government to do it is supposedly inflationary. Instead said govt is supposed to borrow from the Banking Cartel and plunge the country further into debt at the expense of current and future generations. That is the question.

        Why is it that sovereign nations govts that can create money instead go to the banking cartels to have to plunge our country further into debt and place that debt burden on current and future generations?

        No government can create money. They can only spend it. Creating money out of thin air simply reduces the value of every dollar in circulation which will have the exact same effect of putting us deeper into debt.

        BS 1. Any govt can create money.

        2.Banks create money out of thin air every single day yet you don’t see the NZ dollar in freefall do you. Quite the opposite in fact.

        Ergo it stands to reason that the same effect should occur if a govt does it.

        Or do we all live in some migical fairy land where only shareholders of banking institutions can benefit fro m creating money out of thin air.

        Feel free to try again. Hats off to you though you are the first person to actually attemt an answer.

        “Creating money out of thin air simply reduces the value of every dollar in circulation”

        Yet banks do this exact thing every single day of the week through the fractional reserve system. Go and look it up.

        .Predictable American bashing. America is far from perfect and has made mistakes but has largely been a force for good – democracy, freedom, human rights. Your friends the extremists are bad buggers and giving them hugs and cuddles was never going to work.

        No not predictable American bashing as you have put it. Try several years of researching foreign policy and its effects. Who do you think Armed Saddam Hussein, who do you think armed the Taliban, Take a wild guess at who armed ISIS.
        You see I thought (naively) that America was bastion of democracy, the land of the free home of the brave etc etc. But pointing out that they have many times overthrown democratically elected governments and installed dictators… thats not America bashing, no not at all, that is simply a statement of fact. There is plenty of information on the internet from numerous sources. Its not really a secret. look it up.

        Its not about being the words Mr Plod. Its about control of resources and the flow of them. Its about GDP and Profit.

        “You can thank the US that we have these freedoms. They have provided a defensive umbrella over the last 60 years that the Western world has thrived under. As America is a declining power your grandkids may not enjoy the same freedom. They may look back in envy at the halcyon days when the US was the lone superpower.”

        If we don’t change the way we do things then yes probably.

    • 1951

      You are damned right, about when it is time someone got angry. I have watched the Left infiltrate the minds of too many short sighted people for way too long. The push to fill young minds with fear & guilt for possibly contributing a non-existing AGW is unforgivable! There are so many things to feel damned angry about. I suggest you go look beyond what our learning institutions forced down your throat . Let me guide you, go see how many laws & regulations have been passed to restrict our everyday life since your Grandfathers fought in the war.

      • Coffee Connoisseur

        1951 I know what I know inspite of what I was taught in school not because of it. It comes down to common sense. Unfortunately the system and my chosen role within it trained me to be a critical thinker and I have been employed by/contracted services to a number of government departments and private sector companies.

        Be angry at AGW by all means but what you should really be directing your anger at is the root cause. The root cause is the corruption of science by those with vested interests.. Had this not been allowed to occur in the first place we wouldn’t be having any debate on AGW. We would simply know what the science says and that would be the end of it. Instead we have ‘Science’ on both sides of the argument selectively choosing the parts that best fit their narrative. This of course isn’t limited to AGW but the problem exists in many aspects of our life including our food supply and the health industry.

        Yes on the number of Laws passed I am in complete agreement. Perhaps the entire system needs to be reset to common law and the system designed to work for mankind rather than mankind working for it. What we have now is akin to inventing the automobile and then having to push it anywhere you want to go.

        • 1951

          In a nutshell, anything/anyone, be it UN bureaucrats, scientists, pseudoscientists, experts in any field, education, banking or government, the moment their contributions impact on the freedom of the individual to choose, they have no place in our society.

    • IKIDUNOT

      Okay, feel better now???

    • Platinum Fox

      Banks, other than central banks, cannot and DO NOT create money. Every dollar commercial banks lend out is funded partly by the bank’s own capital (the quantum of which is set by a regulator) and the balance by deposits held by savers or bonds sold to and held by investors. If depositors won’t invest their savings with a bank and investors won’t buy its bonds, whether because they don’t have spare cash available to invest or because they perceive the risk/return offered by the bank to be insufficient, then a bank will not be able to increase its lending book.
      When a central bank, such as the Federal Reserve, does expand the money supply through quantitative easing there is a considerable amount of discussion which takes place beforehand and the potential consequences are debated. It’s a near “last resort” action to avoid or lessen the forces of a recession.

      • Coffee Connoisseur

        Banks can and do create money every single day out of nothing.

        A bank must simply have a percentage of the total that it wishes to lend in the form of savings (usually around 10%) This is based on the premise that not everyone will want to withdraw their frunds all at once.

        This is the fractional reserve system.
        take a look at deposit multiplication.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking

        • Platinum Fox

          I think you and the people who wrote that Wikipedia page are both confused about the difference between between liquidity and capital requirements.

          Liquidity – banks are required to hold a percentage of their liabilities (deposits and external bond liabilities) in cash or liquid assets. For that purpose, liquid assets include stock issued by OECD governments (which count at 100%) and stock issued by corporates and quasi-government entities (which are subject to haircuts based on the credit rating of the issuer). Those liquid assets are intended to be capable of being sold in short order to realise sufficient cash to meet the short term liabilities of banks. The objective of the liquidity requirements is to avoid a “run” on a bank or banks.

          Capital – banks must have Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital (basically equity and subordinated debt) to meet minimums set by their regulator. Those percentages are measured against the asset book (loans and advances). Capital requirements act as an effective constraint on banks’ ability to expand their balance sheets. The standardised capital adequacy framework (requirements) set by RBNZ are contained in BS2A in the RBNZ banking supervision handbook.

          As an example, where a loan of $100 is made the bank must have, say, $8 of capital to support that loan and $92 of deposits or bonds on issue. When the client draws down the loan, the $100 might initially appear as a credit in the client’s account but, in my experience, rapidly disappears elsewhere to purchase goods or services. Should the vendor of those goods and services, fortuitously, deposit the funds in the same bank it does not increase the bank’s ability to lend as, unless it has surplus (lazy) capital, the bank will not then have the capital necessary to support the new lending. Normally, of course, the initial application of the funds received by the vendor is applied to reduce its own debt obligation to its bank.

          The bank is required to hold liquidity assets against the near term parts of the $92 of deposits or bonds on issue which fund the $100 loan. BS13 in the RBNZ banking supervision handbook sets out the amounts of liquid assets required and the haircuts applicable are contained in BS13A.

  • TonyM

    Hi SB, I had the same call on Saturday night…. same stupid questions. I gave a simliar response to you …. I think from memory it was UMR that was doing the work. Afterwards I wish I’d asked who they were working for because it sure did seem to have a left slant to it.

  • Benoni

    ” By not protecting Cameron’s rights they have not protected their own rights. The razor cuts both ways. ” Well said and I think that applies to more than the right to privacy of emails, but also to the right to be free of torture.

    • johnbronkhorst

      So we should just nuke ISIS and be done with it then?

      • dgrogan

        Works for me.

  • This is classic push polling. You don’t just get the result you want, but you also try and push the opinion out into the public mind because they get a sense it’s them that’s way off base as their answers don’t line up with those offered.

  • And that is why the left lost the election, they did not have accurate information on the public, thinking they can decide it and then use media to control it. There are too many media outlets now & kiwis have travelled too widely for political parties to completely control how they think.

  • roxo

    It’s not that we are NOT listening . . . it’s how we are not listening – or is it – It’s not that we are NOT listening, we ARE listening, it’s just that we are only listening to what we tell you we want to listen to?

    Just give up now as I think that they will NEVER actually listen to the public. They will only listen to what they want – similar to my 5yo boy!

    So there you have it – Labour is actually a 5yo boy!

  • Christie

    I think I like Andrew Little – I loved his comment, on the last day of Parliament, that he really should pay homage to the Labour leaders that have gone before him (since National took power), but that he only has 10 minutes……

  • Orange

    I got a phone call the other night. I answered the phone saying “I’m Batman”. About 5 seconds of quiet then they hung up.

  • dgrogan

    Labour briefing to pollsters:
    Because we set our own agenda, you need to arrange these questions in such a way as to support the outcomes we have pre-determined. No point at all in the public telling us stuff that doesn’t fit – because we’d then probably have to change our agenda, or at the very least, re-package it. And that would be regressive rather than progressive wouldn’t it. So. Let’s do it.

  • Reid

    John Key uses polls to his advantage because I believe he finds out what people really think and then makes some of his decisions accordingly.

    That’s exactly what he does and it’s why I’ve never rated him.

    Firstly because since when has the will of the people been the answer to anything? e.g. the anti-nuke stance, the minimum wage, the list goes on and on and on and on. Politics is about selling people on the correct thing to do regardless of whether or not they start out thinking that. It’s not repeat, not about leading the lowest common-denominator toward the cliff.

    Secondly because: since when has anyone who understands people (which politicians are supposed to be expert at), needed a poll to tell them what people are thinking? Polls are useful on nuance and for confirmation and correction of instinct, but frankly if you don’t have the instinct in the first place, you’re not qualified to play the game.

  • Michael_l_c

    SB sorry but this sort of survey is very useful to the person paying for it. There is a certainty that it will show that 90% of those surveyed think that Sky City is ‘the home of the devil’ etc, if that was the question asked.
    To understand surveys & statistics you always need the raw data not what the spinners want to release.

  • david

    Could be the pollsters. I have answered a number of questionnaires where the answer – or opinion – I wanted to give was not provided for. I have just done a star alliance one, giving my view of my last flight and the response fields didn’t give me a N/A option. It wouldn’t let me leave them blank. Air NZ has one of these “your opinion matters” questionnaires, but nowhere to actually voice your opinion. Great for tabulated summaries to the board, hopeless for actually getting feedback.

52%