Hard News: Earning Confidence
78 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
...and all that too.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
I thought Cunliffe kept his cool and Key looked bitter and drained.
Meh, might be a bit of projection going on there? I really don’t want to harsh the holiday buzz by looking at the usual suspects, but I’m sure plenty of folks are going on about Cunliffe looking desperate and shrill. Didn’t seem to me either was true.
Saw bits and pieces, while sitting around with our hosts and the television on the background. Seems to me both Key and Cunliffe should be reasonably happy about how it turned out – nobody came up with a soundbite gaffe that will haunt them for the rest of the campaign. Key wasn’t goofy, and Cunliffe did a pretty good job of avoiding that slightly patronizing tone he can slip into to.
That said: There were patches when they both seemed rather… vague on the details of their own policies. Really not an option, guys.
-
Once again, Harold's reporting of poll results leaves a lot to be desired:
And while a slim majority believe the saturation media coverage of the claims in Nicky Hager's book was justified, a slightly larger majority say the furore was either unjustified or that it's time to move on.
Given the article doesn't show the questions actually asked, figuring out what this possibly means takes a bit of mental gymnastics.
-
The worst of it was the dry ice . WTF? Cunliffe won. The detail he didn't have on housing would require actually being in Government. Key has bin there 6 years and he had no detail of any policy bar the deposit for middle income couples which was announced last weekend. Key used slogans.
-
Dismal Soyanz, in reply to
That said: There were patches when they both seemed rather… vague on the details of their own policies. Really not an option, guys.
I lay the blame on both Hosking and whoever set the format with ad breaks. Hosking's inability to stop them talking over each other so much and the short time available per answer gave little incentive to dwell on specifics.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
The detail he didn’t have on housing would require actually being in Government.
Nah, that dog’s not going to hunt. You just don’t get to have it both ways, Sofie – perhaps I’m naive, but I expect party leaders to be able to clearly articulate the details of their own policy especially when (let’s be honest) they’re hardly missing an opportunity to call the other bastards liars who couldn’t organize the proverbial piss-up in a brewery. I’m certainly not saying it reached the level of throwing serious doubt on Cunliffe or Key’s credibility, but they might want to watch that. IIRC, there’s one more debate on One in the final week. That’s not when you want the media focused on asking whether you’re just clueless about your own big ticket policies or deliberately being *cough* strategically ambiguous.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Hosking’s inability to stop them talking over each other so much and the short time available per answer gave little incentive to dwell on specifics.
Fair point -- I really don't know how politicians think talking over each other reads but it bugs the hell out of me. It all comes down to whether you take these things seriously, or view them as infotainment; I wonder if Hosking was just told to let them go at each other, and pray they'd lose their shit for a quick and easy "political bitch-slap!" lead.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Saw bits and pieces, while sitting around with our hosts and the television on the background. Seems to me both Key and Cunliffe should be reasonably happy about how it turned out – nobody came up with a soundbite gaffe that will haunt them for the rest of the campaign. Key wasn’t goofy, and Cunliffe did a pretty good job of avoiding that slightly patronizing tone he can slip into to.
Cunliffe benefited from having taken a couple of days to prepare -- something Key publicly dismissed as unnecessary. And I was quite surprised by what Brent Edwards said: that Cunliffe had a crew in the audience and was consulting with Rob Salmond during the ad breaks, and Key seemed to have no one with him but his DPS staff.
Key wasn't bad, but Cunliffe got in a couple of good speeches and stopped Key from getting his own narrative on. I thought it was tactically astute.
-
What happened to the worm? The Herald provided an interactive dial thing but not sure who monitored or who could see it. It was hard work watching the live streams from both TVNZ and the Green room and tapping the dial all on one computer screen!
Afterwards joined the crowds wandering around the wonderful Lux light sculpture displays along the Wellington waterfront and along the little lanes. Some were activated by screaming which delighted the many children taking advantage of that opportunity. It’s on till Sunday night so those who can should go.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Nah, that dog’s not going to hunt. You just don’t get to have it both ways, Sofie – perhaps I’m naive, but I expect party leaders to be able to clearly articulate the details of their own policy especially when (let’s be honest) they’re hardly missing an opportunity to call the other bastards liars who couldn’t organize the proverbial piss-up in a brewery.
As I understood it at the time, the only was he could have come up with the exact number Hosking was demanding was literally to make it up.
It wasn't as if he didn't have quite a bit of detail on the policy.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I lay the blame on both Hosking and whoever set the format with ad breaks. Hosking’s inability to stop them talking over each other so much and the short time available per answer gave little incentive to dwell on specifics.
I thought the structure was odd: they seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time circling around land/immigration/investment. It leaves a lot for next week’s debate to cover.
Cunliffe did do more of the talking-over, and I'm sure it wasn't an accident. It actually worked fairly well for him.
-
Quote of the morning!
‘Judas’ Collins on morning report:"Susie you may be looking at the Parliamentary Manual,
but lets look at the facts…"…what a woman!
-
william blake, in reply to
Some were activated by screaming
Nice analogy as to how I feel about politicians at the moment; the need to shriek to get the lights to come on.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
an aside...
Some were activated by screaming...
Key was right on one thing in the debate, when he said there will be people screaming at their TV sets - mostly about him and Hosking though!
-
By focusing on the cost of the text-in / website 'poll', people are missing its true idiocy. The 'poll' asked 'who won the debate' (past tense), but people were able to vote right from the BEGINNING. So many did so that the online voting system crashed by the FIRST ad break.
The closing addresses, for example, often have a big influence on perceptions of who wins a debate, but would have had negligible influence on that 'poll', simply because the vast bulk of responses would have been collected earlier. Given that the website crashed early on (meaning that it was receiving a lot of votes), it seems probable that a significant percentage were submitted in the first few moments of the debate.
If it measures anything, it measures who people expected to win, not who actually did. Coupled with all the other problems of text-in / website polls, it has no statistical validity whatsoever.
Would it have been so hard to have the poll afterwards?
-
Nora Leggs, in reply to
Afterwards joined the crowds wandering around the wonderful Lux light sculpture displays along the Wellington waterfront and along the little lanes. …. It’s on till Sunday night so those who can should go.
and pop some pictures up on the old Capture, Dark Arts thread - for election campaign 'light relief' : )
-
Dismal Soyanz, in reply to
Steven, Steven, Steven. When are are going to realise that an opportunity to make money always trumps public interest?
-
Sacha, in reply to
I wonder if Hosking was just told to let them go at each other
Cunliffe says Hosking told them to "parry". Then the guy bitches about them doing exactly that in one of his smug ZB columns.
-
Alfie, in reply to
By focusing on the cost of the text-in / website 'poll', people are missing its true idiocy. The 'poll' asked 'who won the debate' (past tense), but people were able to vote right from the BEGINNING. So many did so that the online voting system crashed by the FIRST ad break.
It was a pointless addition to the debate, along with the dry ice. While TVNZ used their best efforts to turn the event into some sort of game show, the text poll was a bad joke. It would be interesting to see a geographic breakdown of where those texts were coming from. Not a lot from South Auckland I reckon.
Maybe it's projection on my part, but I feel that Key is starting to look tired and a good deal older these days. The fallout from Dirty Politics and having to continuously defend the indefensible Judith seems to be taking its toll.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
I thought the structure was odd: they seemed to spend an inordinate amount of time circling around land/immigration/investment.
I thought that was a bit odd too, because Winston's usual Yellow Peril dog-whistle bullshit aside is it really that big an issue for anyone? Still, I think Cunliffe (to his credit) managed to avoid getting that stink all over him, though I still think someone needs to nut up and call bullshit on the not-that-subtly coded race-baiting behind chuntering about "foreign ownership." I mentally turn down the volume a notch every time China gets mentioned to the exclusion of everywhere else.
-
I blogged about last night including some useful supporting links. Scroll to the bottom to watch the 15m clip of Hager’s masterful speech the previous day, even if you ignore the rest.
-
Lucy Lawless comes to similar conclusions.
If we do not require integrity in our representatives, we are basically ceding control of our policymakers.
...
This is our chance to reinforce our reputation as the least corrupt nation on earth. The Dirty Politics allegations are thankfully not on a par with the kind of filth being exposed by Operation Yewtree in the UK, but we may as well nip this in the bud, right? And don't listen to people who think all politicians are dishonest. The vast majority want to contribute to the welfare and prosperity of our people and it's our responsibility to see that they do. As they say, we get the government we deserve. -
Hebe,
Two impressions - not words - stood out in the debate. David Cunliffe physically took over, moving into Key's space, defining his own and looking centred and confident, without overbearing. That's a big change. He came across on screen for the first time as he does in person.
The other was how rattled, even diminished, John Key looked from the first glimpse. I conjecture that he watched, or was told of, Winston Peters' claims on TV3 at 6pm. He was reeling, like we have never seen before. He almost got back into stride a couple of times but curiously tailed off.
Could have watched with the sound off really.
-
Hebe, in reply to
Yep. It's about the kind of country we all want to live in: whatever it takes as the motto, or one with communal vision and responsibility.
I would be appalled at any party, anywhere, using these tactics and supporting the use of them in any way.
-
I know polls are but a small sample but I think voters like to back, almost apparently more than good policies, someone who is a winner. Labour has been beaten down and beaten up for so long that voters still seem to lack faith in what is in front of their eyes. I think Labour just needs a poll, any poll, to show some significant upward movement and then surely they will be away - others might feel confident if they know others see things the same way. It conforms the nagging thought in the back of their heads that Cunliffe might actually be a better option. Cunliffe seems to have either at least held his own or beaten comfortably Key but when does the headway show?It just is remarkable to me with so many negatives for National - just how little impact all of this seems to have had on polling. I mean there is some but not much. I guess that just shows how entrenched people's attitudes are.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.