If National wins ...

**Bjauck** · 12-09-2017, 07:44 PM

Maybe Jacinda became Labour Leader two weeks too early. Is the honeymoon with the electorate now over and the veil has been lifted to reveal the same Labour Party that the electorate already knew previously? Has Jazz-cinda become Just-cinda?

**fungus pudding** · 12-09-2017, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by Bjauck

Maybe Jacinda became Labour Leader two weeks too early. Is the honeymoon with the electorate now over and the veil has been lifted to reveal the same Labour Party that the electorate already knew previously? Has Jazz-cinda become Just-cinda?

We can only hope so.

**Bjauck** · 12-09-2017, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by fungus pudding

Is it a reversal or just a temporary blip deflating?

The National Party share of the vote is back to where it was in June and May Newshub polls. Maybe it was just a new Labour leader blip.

**fungus pudding** · 12-09-2017, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by Bjauck

The National Party share of the vote is back to where it was in June and May Newshub polls. Maybe it was just a new Labour leader blip.

We can only hope so.

**winner69** · 12-09-2017, 08:08 PM

I quoted from this a week or so ago - you can't trust polls

https://www.johnkay.com/2017/06/07/f...opinion-polls/

Quota sampling is not the same as random sampling from a population. Rather, it uses a model to estimate from the answers which are received what the answers would have been if the people giving answers had been a random selection from the population. Modern pollsters know that their sample is not in any sense random, and now use sophisticated and complex models to adjust for their failure to achieve randomness. But this confronts the pollsters, and those who want to use their results, with the problem that Mr Viniar had failed to recognise: the probability derived from the model has to be compounded with the probability that the model is itself true. And we have no means of deriving the latter probability, or indeed of attaching meaning to such a probability.We can usefully say things like “the pollsters are very experienced”, or “the model has worked well in the past”. But these are statements about confidence and judgement, not about probabilities.

**Baa_Baa** · 12-09-2017, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by fungus pudding

Is it a reversal or just a temporary blip deflating?

For Labour, it looks like a temporary blip deflating. Jacinda will be in a world of hurt, such a rapid rise in popularity but stealing the water <=> support from ANY farmer. Taxing everything to pay for everything promised, without any detail, except the 'ruling outs' (ergo they have tax policy but aren't telling) <=> support from anyone with any assets. The rest of her pitch is wafer thin, deftly put down by National. But I'd still like to see National put up a counter to free tertiary education.

**fungus pudding** · 12-09-2017, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by Baa_Baa

For Labour, it looks like a temporary blip deflating. Jacinda will be in a world of hurt, such a rapid rise in popularity but stealing the water <=> support from ANY farmer. Taxing everything to pay for everything promised, without any detail, except the 'ruling outs' (ergo they have tax policy but aren't telling) <=> support from anyone with any assets. The rest of her pitch is wafer thin, deftly put down by National. But I'd still like to see National put up a counter to free tertiary education.

Jacinda has magic powers. She is going to run a TV network on $28,000,000 per. annum. Thats clever.
Tertiary education is a bargain at what the students pay.

**minimoke** · 12-09-2017, 09:39 PM

Originally Posted by fungus pudding

Jacinda has magic powers. She is going to run a TV network on $28,000,000 per. annum. Thats clever.
Tertiary education is a bargain at what the students pay.

If she can do a high speed train from Tauranga to Auckland for $20m then a new TV channel for that kind of money should be achievable.

Until she discovers it isn't and up go the taxes to pay for it all.