Cunliffe’s poll
May 19th, 2011 at 8:49 am by David FarrarJohm Armstrong writes in the Herald:
A case of jumping the Budget gun only to shoot yourself in the foot? David Cunliffe, Labour’s finance spokesman, found himself a laughing stock in Parliament yesterday after a poll asking families whether they were better off or worse off as a result of the Budget appeared on his website.
The poll was an embarrassment for Cunliffe for two reasons. First, the Budget has yet to be delivered. Second – and worse from Labour’s point of view – nearly 90 per cent of those responding said they were better off.
Those respondents must have known something about the Budget that the rest of us won’t until this afternoon.
More likely, National supporters organised enough votes to skew the findings in their party’s favour.
Actually it was fairly spontaneous. I blogged yesterday on Cunliffe’s premature poll, and I think blog readers just decided to have some fun.
Having ensured the poll was taken down from Cunliffe’s website, Labour was insisting the survey was one that appeared on the site after last year’s Budget. A computer glitch had resulted in the poll reappearing.
A computer glitch? Sometimes I have things *not* appear due to a glitch, but I’ve never had something appear by itself with no human involvement.
What was amusing in the House was thet the Speaker was at first reluctant to allow the website poll to be tabled, as he discourages tabling of stuff already in the public domain. However when it was pointed out Labour had removed the poll from the website, that meant it was then okay to table it.
May 19th, 2011 at 9:03 am
That’s a bizarre excuse. Maybe it was lost in the post, or a dog ate the poll cable.
However it does suggest they aren’t planning on reappearing it again today – but you never know what computers might do, especially those that can’t add up votes or calculate percentages properly.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:03 am
I also blogged about this on Tuesday night, anxious to help David Cunliffe’s poll reach an accurate conclusion. In my blog-post I posed a potential question that a government MP could pose at Question Time. WhaleOil linked to the question as well.
During Q2 yesterday, Louise Upston obliged, with an almost word-perfect rendition of the question, which elicted the expected response from Bill English. It was music to my ears! To his credit, Cunliffe took it in good humour, as can be seen in the video on the post below.
http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2011/05/asking-questions.html
Surely at some point, Labour is going to have to revisit its use of the blogosphere and social media sites. The VRWC has been far too organised for them, and every campaign they have tried has ended with red faces. It’s time for Labour’s master strategists Trevor Mallard and Pete Hodgson (together with Chris Hipkins, famously described by Mallard as the Boy Wonder) to come up with something new and innovative
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:05 am
I2.
Vote:” something new and Innovative”
A new front bench perhaps?
May 19th, 2011 at 9:08 am
Actually Alex, I was thinking of something more radical; something like attacks on John Key’s credibility through tenuous links to BMW dealers and the like …
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:12 am
Surely at some point, Labour is going to have to revisit its use of the blogosphere and social media sites.
No sign of that happening yet, and it’s not just their online strategy that needs revisiting by the look of this:
And they are too inward looking with blinkers to be embarrassed.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:14 am
Nice to see Labour laughing at themselves for once.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:22 am
More likely, National supporters organised enough votes to skew the findings in their party’s favour.
The VRWC has been far too organised for them
I don’t agree with either claim. Social media is spontaneous and uncontrollable, and in this case I think an opportunity to take the piss was the most prevalent motivation.
Social media can be very effective, but it’s also very risky, because most attempts either go nowhere or backfire, and successes are very difficult to manipulate, they just happen. On the other hand failures are much easier to be facilitated, especially when politics is involved.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:27 am
“To which I would reply, which does more harm to Kiwi kids, the occasional glimpse of the word “bullshit”, or National’s attacks on early education?”
this is gold
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:27 am
This is too good to be true. Oh please, please, please let them run with that!
Shhhh…nobody say anything.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:27 am
Oh dear, there goes his play for the Labour leadership.
With a name like Cunliffe it is hardly surprising.
Next batter up please.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:30 am
PS: If some rascal were to spray-paint out the top line and tick box, using red paint.
Some people would find that funny.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:32 am
The power of suggestion is a wonderful thing Peter
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:33 am
“I can’t manage my website, but let me manage our $120b economy.” How does Labour have any credibility?
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:35 am
Oh please, please, please let them run with that!
According to this they are already running.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:35 am
Not that anyone should, of course. That would be wrong.
But some would find it funny. No doubt.
Kids these days….
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:35 am
I also really hope that they run with that billboard. Surely about 90% of NZers would work out who the idealogues are – those who rule out any privatisation any time, ever, or those who say that maybe a little bit in the right areas might make sense.
You have a spectrum of government involvement in various areas of the economy, and you basically declare that it’s a one way ratchet – the government should nationalise stuff (rail, ACC, Air NZ), but should never ever, under any circumstances, put anything back into private ownership.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:37 am
A much better lie would have been:
Anyway, bring on the budget. I saw a great line graph in the Dom Post this morning showing how Cullen steadily paid Muldoon’s debt mountain down to almost nothing, here’s hoping English can take a step or two in that direction.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:50 am
IV2, in that video from your blog post, Bill English kept talking that the budget forecast showed strong economic growth, but is he kidding the public? The idiots at the Treasury have kept using outdated bullshit forecasting methods that have been consistently shown to be wrong. Why should we believe the Rasputin-type economics’ oracles at the Treasury & Bill English, when they could have become millionaires by trading in the markets with their perfect foresight of future markets/economics dynamic movements? ANSWER. Oracles don’t believe in their own predictions, but they know that other idiots do take them seriously.
Left wing commentator Bernard Hickey has a good point about forecasts from the Treasury.
Take forecasts with grain of salt
I believe that the Treasury is using DSGE, which is a mechanistic model but markets & economic systems are not mechanistic (representative rational agent – reductionist), where equilibrium doesn’t exist. There is no surprise that DSGE is wrong almost all the time.
The US Congress hosted hearings on macroeconomic modeling methods on July 20, 2010, to investigate why macro-economists failed to foresee the Financial crisis of 2007-2010. Economics Nobel Laureate Robert Solow blasted DSGE models currently in use in his testimony to Congress:
‘I do not think that the currently popular DSGE models pass the smell test. They take it for granted that the whole economy can be thought about as if it were a single, consistent person or dynasty carrying out a rationally designed, long-term plan, occasionally disturbed by unexpected shocks, but adapting to them in a rational, consistent way… The protagonists of this idea make a claim to respectability by asserting that it is founded on what we know about microeconomic behavior, but I think that this claim is generally phony. The advocates no doubt believe what they say, but they seem to have stopped sniffing or to have lost their sense of smell altogether.
Also another Economics Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz has stated in a conference last year of the wrong formulations of DSGE, “Agenda for Reforming Economic Theory” – Joseph Stiglitz.
Now, I believe that Prof. Robert Solow is correct after all. The oracles at the Treasury do believe what they say (and their advisory to Bill English & Govt), but they seem to have stopped sniffing or to have lost their sense of smell altogether.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:54 am
Don’t know why he didn’t just own up and say “I hit ‘publish’ instead of ‘preview’ by mistake”, which almost certainly would have been what happened. Instead he’s fabricated a story that undermines his credibility.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 9:57 am
@ toad – that assumes that Cunliffe HAD credibility.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:00 am
About 35 years ago (Jeez, that’s frightening writing that) Bob Jones published a book with a title something like “The achievements of the third (?) labour government” Every page was blank.
Someone could so the same, with a title like “Embarrassing failures of labour in opposition: 2008 -2010″….the pages certainly wouldn’t be blank…
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:01 am
IV2 said…
that assumes that Cunliffe HAD credibility
But our leftist resident commenator here on Kiwiblog, Magic Bullet thinks that David Cunliffe is smart because he went to Havard. Yep, that’s right Magic Bullet, David Cunliffe the scholar from Havard is really smart.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:03 am
Toad – yes, he would have done better claiming a simple mistake and laughing it off.
But…what surprises me is how long it took for him/them to remove it. If it was a mistake (“computer” or not) someone in Labour must have been aware of it.
DPF posted on it on Tuesday at 4.34 pm so it was up by then and publicised.
Elaycee posted results on Wednesday at 8.43 am.
Sadu posted at 9.46 am that it had been taken down.
That’s a long time to take to correct a “mistake”.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:21 am
And to think this imbecile could be someday be our Minister of Finance!
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:29 am
stupid labour supporters.
just shows the calibre.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:34 am
Manolo @ 10.21am
Only if you vote for him.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:36 am
Proud to say I have never voted Labour and, more importantly, never will.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:37 am
Clever and smart…..not the same thing. Lots of book learning lets you draw ridiculous conclusions using statistics. A bit intelligence and thought would have had you going “yup, put the poll up ahead of time, wasn’t the right call. Won’t be doing that again.” Issue neutered, story over. But no, had a computer glitch. Not my fault. Don’t understand why this is an issue. Those aren’t vote winning stories.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:48 am
Damn stupid fucks.
Wasn’t budget day last year May 20th?
Sort of puts their argument to an immediate holt.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 10:55 am
Halt???
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 11:04 am
In a further example of their organisational skills Stuff (http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/budget-2011/5023232/Key-bets-his-job-on-the-Budget) reports that Labour are frustrated because the Budget debate could interfere with their congress this weekend. How long have they known when the budget was due?
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 11:17 am
RRM: I saw a great line graph in the Dom Post this morning showing how Cullen steadily paid Muldoon’s debt mountain down to almost nothing,
Was the graph depicting total debt in $B, or as a %age of GDP. If the latter to get a true picture you need to also look at GDP growth. Most debt graphs Ive seen used are debt as a %age of GDP.
If GDP is increasing (ie: the country is growing), and the government has large enough surpluses (both of which happened over the majority of Labour term) meaning the government doesnt have to borrow therefore debt remains stagnant (although obviously it should be decreasing with debt repayments & servicing), but with the country growing it will look like debt is going down cause the debt %age of GDP is shrinking.
If you take these assumed figures…
2000: debt = 60B and GDP = 100B
2001: debt = 60B and GDP = 120B
2002: debt = 60B and GDP = 140B
2003: debt = 60B and GDP = 160B
2004: debt = 60B and GDP = 180B
2005: debt = 60B and GDP = 200B
2006: debt = 60B and GDP = 220B
2007: debt = 60B and GDP = 240B
Plot the Debt to GDP ration on a graph you’d be like: “OMG Cullen has mad skillz at paying down debt”, but in reality he hasn’t, all that has happened is the country as grown to a point where debt as a %age of GDP is alot less.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 11:22 am
@ PaulL – the shadow of Helen Clark still looms large over Labour – never, EVER admit you’re wrong!
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 11:49 am
Sounds like a lot of people enjoyed taking Cunliffe’s poll. Whatever would Damian O’Connor think?
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 11:51 am
I am pleased we have a spell checker here, sadly you miss the other 4879 that are made each and every day here including the leader himself. So please pick up your game.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
I’m sure you’re a good guy Michaels, but it was kinda ironic seeing as you were refering to stupidity
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
“I didn’t notice the poll get published on the web site. I was too busy working in the back seat”.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 1:29 pm
http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/budget-fears-prompt-beehive-protest-4179595
Already protesting it…. zzzzz
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 2:02 pm
Already protesting it…. zzzzz
I can picture the billboards now:
“Damn the debt, the kids will pick up the tab!”
“Whats 350M, when we could be borrowing 650M”
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 3:36 pm
referring.
Vote:May 19th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
No sign of the poll yet having returned to http://www.cunliffe.co.nz
Vote:May 20th, 2011 at 7:14 am
@ cabbage, dammit! ya got me
Vote: