Wednesday, 19 April 2017

Help sabotage bad politicking.



This the best ever explanation of opinion polls, it particularly relates to political parties miss-use and manipulation of polls and thanks Donna for this wonerful blog...
 

How to sabotage bad politicking « The Daily Blog
Donna Miles

Yesterday, an email arrived in my inbox from the Labour Party’s 2017 campaign manager, asking one question: Who was I planning to vote for in the upcoming general election?
With the election only 158 days away, the email said, Labour needed to direct their limited resources to the right places.

I am not interested in analysing how my answer would have affected the allocation of Labour’s “limited resources”- that is not the point here- my main concern is how polling is taking center stage in the way politics is being conducted in most developed countries including our own.   
Remember how John Key reserved a special thank-you for the National pollster David Farrar during his 2014 election victory speech?

Key knew Farrar was instrumental in shaping the National Party’s policy direction so that it remained popular with their supporters- often at the expense of New Zealand’s long-term interests.
The result has been catastrophic inactions in many areas leading to housing crisis, environmental degradation, increasing poverty, widening inequality and worsening financial instability.   

Opposition parties do the same. They use opinion polls to attract votes, putting power before conviction.
Great leaders are supposed to shape popular opinion, not become slaves to it.
They are supposed to lead the country for the long-term wellbeing of all citizens, not for the short-term gains that secure their power.

I wonder, for instance, if the Waitangi Tribunal would have existed or its powers ever extended, if those in government at the time, had a way of assessing the true extent of the popular opposition to it.   
The success of Brexit in the UK and Donald Trump in the US showed the folly of political polling but was not enough to secure its demise.

Yesterday, the UK Prime Minister Theresa May made a U-turn on her promise not to call a snap election. She did this for one simple reason: the latest poll put the Tories on a comfortable 21 points ahead of Labour, giving them the greatest lead while in government since 1983.
If that is not a perfect example of opinion polls directing politics then I don’t know what is.  
Focus groups and opinion polls exist, not to strengthen our democracy, but to help politicians gain and maintain power by playing strategical games and by framing political messages in a language that carries the widest appeal.

This type of politicking encourages the public to view politics through a narrow prism of rhetoric and theatre that is devoid of essence and analysis.
So, is there a way of changing this?  

The obvious way to promote a more meaningful political debate is through the mainstream media, but given the media’s focus on clickbait journalism, that is just wishful thinking.
But what if we all sabotaged political polling by never answering the questions correctly?
If these polls turn out to be consistently wrong then maybe the politicians are forced to rely less on populisms and more on doing the right thing.  

We need to tell politicians that taking the lazy route of appealing to people’s prejudices and misconceptions are not acceptable options.
Almost all the major political parties are busy formulating clever ways to “emotionally connect” with the voters. We need to say: Thanks but no thanks.  

Appealing to the voters’ emotions, rather than their heads, is exactly what is wrong with politics today. Just think John Key, Brexit and Trump!
Good politicking is about demonstrating, clearly, how policies are actually going to make meaningful differences to the citizens’ wellbeing.

So, let’s encourage good politicking by getting rid of the bad. Let’s sabotage opinion polls.
http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2017/04/20/how-to-sabotage-bad-politicking/

 

Saturday, 8 April 2017

Who is Next





Trumps popularity ratings fall to below 32%, so he bombs an empty air field in Syria on behalf of yet another lot of civilians’ murdered by Assad or the rebels, or the Russians or even the Americans remembering that they have a habit of bombing hospitals, schools.
Any way Senator Marco Rubio is a Republican Religious nut case who stood for the nomination for President on behalf of the Republican Party…as we are all aware dear pink rinse Donald Trump got [brought] the nomination and won the position via the manipulation of the voting system…

all that is history now, it’s funny, but deadly representative of today’s political stupidity. Religious nutter Rubio made the statement printed below: Read it carefully and you’ll see what an idiot this bible thumping twit actually is:  
  
Somehow this born-again wacky Senator ‘Salutes the bravery and skill of the men and woman of the US armed forces who conducted this mission” beat that for utter crap…what the hell is brave about sitting thousands of miles away in the absolute protection of a Missile ship,,, Do you have to be brave to use a computer as you fire your missiles at a target thousands of miles away…and judging by past indications, accidentally miss the so-called targets and hit instead a hospital or a shopping centre, or even a school full of children. There was no guts required to pull the trigger, therefor no bravery was needed, just a NAZI like devotion to killing on command. I’ve no doubt it took some skill to operate the computers etc and I would imagine that the criminal individuals who did most likely learned their killing skills by firing the drones that have now murdered thousands of innocent people.
Remember that under US law what these brave men and woman service people did was a war crime, because the President has no authority to declare war…why has no military person stood up to tell the President that without the correct and legal authority we cannot fire our weapons. Now that would have been brave…that would have been heroic…

Our weirdo Rubio suggests that Donald Trump will stop Assad from committing war crimes…yeah right… But who the hell is going to stop the US from continuing to commit war crimes, in Iraq, Yemen, Israel, Egypt, and Pakistan. Who is going to bring Bush, Clinton, Obama, Blair etc. to trial for their crimes against humanity? It would seem that no one in the US military establishment has the guts or the ability to stand up for justice…it would so seem that no one in the US Justice system has the fortitude to confront the new Fascist that rules the white house.

We here in New Zealand have every reason to be concerned that out own politicians lack the fortitude and back bone to say no to the new American dictatorship…but with twenty years of cringing to the mighty dollar kissing the backsides of various US Presidents. With the last ten years of sharing in the crimes being committed in the Middle East by the illegal invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, we lack even the national courage to investigate our own military behaviour…so much for bravery…

I’m not sure if this is the turning point, or if we’ve all gone too far down the corruption path of the US empire…that seems to be rotting the core of future humanity… 
          

Thursday, 23 March 2017

Some background to our new HC in London



These powerful words appeared in a blog: The lies referred to are those spun by Helen Clark and John Key.
 ....
“All these lies were used to justify the longest ever deployment of New Zealand troops overseas (12 years) by successive Labour and National governments. They sent New Zealanders to risk their lives defending corrupt regimes run by warlords and drug barons. This ended in tragedy for several New Zealand soldiers along with tens of thousands of Afghani civilians and their families – killed by foreign invaders which included New Zealand SAS troops.
We were there because the US wanted us there to help support their plans for economic and military global dominance.
So we share a significant chunk of responsibility for the violence and chaos resulting from the invasion and occupation
Our troops behaved badly from the outset by handing over “suspects” they captured to American forces who tortured and often murdered their captives and despite the supposed bravery of our SAS troops their spineless leader Jerry Mataparae (since appointed governor general and now High Commissioner in London) never had the courage to insist on Geneva Convention treatment for people they handed over to the US.
One New Zealand SAS soldier was quoted as saying “we sort of knew what would happen to the prisoners, Americans being Americans”.
If any New Zealander has blood on their hands from Afghanistan it is Jerry Mateparae.
The revelations in “Hit and Run” must be investigated by our government so New Zealand can make some recompense for the tragedy of our involvement in Afghanistan.
Facing up is the first step.

After reading the above you might like to consider the rapid rise and rise of the then Defence Chief Jerry Mataparae,[pictured] he became the boss of the GCSB but resigned after a very short period so that John Key could move his friend and school mate Ian Fletcher in to the role so as to carry out mass surveillance processes against New Zealanders.
Then good old Jerry became Governor General and now he is the High Commissioner in London. Is this simply accidental, or was it planned after the events of the village revenge raids in Afghanistan which have now made the headlines because of the investigative abilities of both Nicky Hager and Jon Stephenson
We know that when the then Minister of Defence Wayne Mapp phoned the PM to get consent for the raid that General [Mataparae] was present.

The Book Hit and Run states that Mataparae was present in the operations control centre and observed the whole event as it took place…if he knew what actually took place and assisted the SAS and Defence to instigate a cover-up operation, this would or could give him a sure pathway to future employment prospects. By the same token it would give the PM a tool by which to manipulate the Defence Force Chief. 
This of course may not have
been the case, and if it wasn’t, then Jerry Mataparae was simply very lucky indeed. Think about it, he resigns which lets John Key using very ‘unusual’ processes to recruit his buddy Ian Fletcher [pictured] as CGSB chief and becomes Governor General. Was Jerry Mataparae asked / forced to resign from that key position after only a few months.

This is a question worth asking in all seriousness because it leads to other questions.

It is often said, that one lie leads to another lie. I wonder if that was the case. That thought grows stronger when one considers that Key resigned around the same time as Mataparae was appointed as High Commissioner to London.

Maybe it was just a lucky break for good old tough guy Jerry Mataparae boss of the SAS and simply he was innocently moved around by the then PM to suit his strategic goals…who knows but it has a ring to it. If true it has a very disturbing echo to it. It stinks of rewarding unbecoming behaviour, manipulation of the worst kind. I hope it’s not true. Honour is not simply a word, it’s an behaviour.

The Americans once had a President who said, “I’m not a Crook”, the American didn’t believe him and threw him on the scrap heap of history. 

 

Thursday, 16 March 2017

PNCC ball carriers stay silent:



Council ball carriers stay silent: More non-news makes the front page…


 Following on from an earlier blog on the subject the PNCC have decided to relook at creating a by-law to remove beggars from its streets…which is a bit weird really when one considers that there are only eight of them.
I noticed that according to the report, none of those with balls spoke on the issue [other than the Mayor who I think has balls]; go to http://wheelerscornernz.blogspot.co.nz/2017/03/whats-difference-between-beggar-and.html to see my earlier comments.

This from Manawatu Standard:

Palmerston North reverts to bylaw proposal to tackle a handful of beggars.
A ban on beggars in Palmerston North is still on the cards, despite the idea's previous rejection.
Palmerston North councillors have decided not to continue with the softly-softly social-work approach to ensuring the city's beggars are looked after.
Instead, elected representatives have again decided to explore a bylaw that bans the practice – despite binning the idea last year.
This comes after mayor Grant Smith last week described some beggars as "holding the city to ransom".
The council's trial with the MASH Trust comes to an end on March 24.
Community services manager Ian Littleworth said the contract had helped some beggars to get off the streets.
"It had been successful in supporting those prepared to be helped.
"But there is a hard core left, who are there for the money."
Smith said just a handful of people continued to cause problems.
He said making sure people's social needs were met was good, but it was time to do more.
"I'm up for another go at it."
Among the reasons the council earlier rejected a bylaw were concerns about the costs of prosecuting, whether stopping people from sitting in a public place was a breach of the Bill of Rights, and whether punitive action was appropriate for people with health and disability problems.
Policy analyst Peter Ridge said council staff had considered last year whether declaring beggars nuisances under a bylaw was the best way of dealing with the problem, and advised that it was not.
"It does not achieve much for council in terms of power. It only gives powers of prosecution for a breach, to gather evidence and file a prosecution with the court, and it does not give powers to arrest."
The Summary Offences Act covered situations where beggars were intimidating people and the police had power to arrest.
Cr Lorna Johnson said she was wary of a bylaw and voted against developing one.
It was a high-risk approach and no silver bullet, she said.
It was a disproportionate response to problems caused by about eight people.
"It's a significant investment of time and money and has no guarantee of success."
The committee recommended against developing a public education programme to discourage people from giving money to beggars.
Cr Gabrielle Bundy-Cooke said she was keen to make progress with a bylaw.
"We know these people, we know how many there are, and we need to be seen as doing something."

Poor old Bruce Watt Photography owner/manager Dave Edmonds must have been deeply disappointed that only two women Councillors had the balls to speak…one made sense [Johnson] while the other [Bundy-Cooke] was more interested in her Hair Salon takings.
It’s going to be fun to see what the Councillors come up with. Will the Beggars be forced to wear a yellow Star of David on their clothing, or paint their faces green and white, will a rugby club be authorised to transport beggars to the edge of the city limits and dump them on the side of the road.

The council may of course decide to make each beggar an honouree City Councillor and allow them to use the Councillors bar, now that might keep them off the street.

I’m sure Cr. Bundy-Cooke would be only too willing to give up say 50% of her salary and share it amongst the beggars, that could mean that in a couple of weeks they could get off  benefits and be reclassified as entrepreneurs and receive free grants and maybe even run as Act Party Candidates in the upcoming general elections.

Dave Edmonds may even welcome them into his shop as customers and charge them double the normal price for a print or two.

PS;
It would seem that at long last, someone at the Manawatu Standard has seen the light and has decided to shed some light on this non news item and tell it as it really is. Making mountains out of mole hills is a very idiotic pathway to truth and simply turns readers off. Truth may, just may in the end improve the lot of our sensationalist main stream media.