Speaker: Identification strategy: Now it’s personal
184 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 8 Newer→ Last
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Any time you're up for it!!
-
BenWilson, in reply to
I’m tired of the squiggly red lines every time I time I type “Labour”
Yes, it should give blue squiggly lines under "National", just for balance.
-
Latest is that Barfoot & Thompson are trying to chase the leaker, if it was actually one of their own. And given that the Barfoot patriarch was a big donor to the NACTs at the last election, and the head of the 'Thompson' half of B&T dismissed NZ home buyers as too entitled...
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
Standard issues...
Hahahaha I instigated a Bayesians vs Frequentists comments battle!
Do they, perhaps, need new flags to rally under, too?
...and what do the old ones look like?Much like the Labour or National voters id problem
- how can we pick them on the street? -
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
We probably can't really expect Rob to take responsibility for what Labour wanted out of all of this. It's on Labour, and Twyford particularly, to explain.
Up to a point, Lord Copper. Up to a point. I think we can expect Rob to do precisely that when he's still fronting the media to attempt to justify the work he put his name on. And if he was doing it for (say) the Ministry of Social Development or Auckland Council, we'd be saying "too bloody right."
And I'll even do Rob the courtesy of assuming he's a lot more astute about the political uses and abuses of the kind of work he does than he's pretending to be.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Latest is that Barfoot & Thompson are trying to chase the leaker, if it was actually one of their own. And given that the Barfoot patriarch was a big donor to the NACTs at the last election, and the head of the ‘Thompson’ half of B&T dismissed NZ home buyers as too entitled…
Far be it from me to bork a good political conspiracy theory, but we’re looking at putting our house on the market and moving back to Wellington after David retires. I’d rather not deal with any real estate agency who’s prone to “leaking” personal data to be (ab)used in political race trolling. I’m a bit weird like that, and would be no matter who I vote for… You may not much like who Peter Thompson makes political donations to, but the fact remains Barfoot and Thompson is a very big real estate company that has a perfectly rational reason not to have their entire operation tainted by this bullshit.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Dear Russell, when the hell are we going to get an NZ English spell checker on PAS??? I’m tired of the squiggly red lines every time I time I type “Labour”
I'm fairly sure that's not our spellchecker. I think it'll be your American-made web browser.
-
Yeah, I get a squiggly line under Labor. Because my desktop is correctly set up for NZ English.
-
And if Labour put this much effort into programming an algorithm to identify us, I wonder if it also estimated how many New Zealand Chinese votes this study would cost them.
Based on the 2011 NZES survey, not many. That's a National or Did-Not-Vote bunch of voters.
-
Tze Ming Mok, in reply to
Based on the 2011 NZES survey, not many. That’s a National or Did-Not-Vote bunch of voters.
Damn you McLaughlan, now you've got me downloading microdata past my bedtime. But I also just had a peep at the questionnaire and the ethnicity categories only reach to "Chinese, Indian or other Asian".
-
the ethnicity categories only reach to “Chinese, Indian or other Asian
Yes. You can also specify your ethnicity; most of the entries in this category are people writing 'New Zealander' in a state of high dudgeon.
-
Tze Ming Mok, in reply to
Based on the 2011 NZES survey, not many. That’s a National or Did-Not-Vote bunch of voters.
Okay, five minutes later, you're right: if by 'not many', you mean there are 'not many' Chinese people *in* the NZES 2011. There are 103 'Chinese, Indian or other Asian' respondents in the dataset. That's about 3% of the dataset, meaning that Asians altogether are under-represented in the survey - about three times less than there should be. And of course, we don't know their actual ethnic group as the top code for Asians is basically 'Asian' ('Chinese, Indian or other Asian'). We can only guess the rough proportions of ethnicities of those 103 people going by our general 'Census proportion' habit. I guess a third of these are Chinese, a third Indian, and a third 'other Asian'. Which means that even if we knew they were Chinese, there would barely be enough sample for healthy statistical inference. Nerd out.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Okay, five minutes later, you’re right: if by ‘not many’, you mean there are ‘not many’ Chinese people *in* the NZES 2011. There are 103 ‘Chinese, Indian or other Asian’ respondents in the dataset. That’s about 3% of the dataset, meaning that Asians altogether are under-represented in the survey – about three times less than there should be.
Crikey! Did not know that.
-
There's a weight column which makes the data a bit more robust. But yeah, Asian and Pacifica New Zealanders are way younger than other demographics, which gives them lower response rates to surveys like these, so the data isn't as robust as you'd like. On the other hand, it's all there is.
-
Tze Ming Mok, in reply to
There’s a weight column which makes the data a bit more robust. But yeah, Asian and Pacifica New Zealanders are way younger than other demographics, which gives them lower response rates to surveys like these, so the data isn’t as robust as you’d like. On the other hand, it’s all there is.
I got no hate for the NZES, but from my incredibly brief glimpse just now, not a particularly sound basis for any political party to strategically write off the NZ Chinese vote…
-
The responses to Q B9 - number of immigrants allowed into NZ - are also interesting.
-
Tze Ming Mok, in reply to
Surprise, Asians are significantly more sympathetic to immigration!
And there were only 17 NZ-born Asians in the sample, so not a very good basis for subgroup analysis there.
We may also expect that those Asians who were least likely to participate in the survey may have skewed towards the FOB side, which we could correlate with non-voting behaviour... or not.
Again, if this is the best we have, it shouldn’t give anyone much confidence that they could get away with throwing this particular population under a bus to get elected. -
Tze Ming Mok, in reply to
But of course, there is a lot more in this dataset that I am not going to get to before bedtime...
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Again, if this is the best we have, it shouldn’t give anyone much confidence that they could get away with throwing this particular population under a bus to get elected.
I doubt it’s all we have. Labour will be doing their own polling, and the party people will at least have a rough feel for the number of sympathetic Asian people they deal with. That has the advantage that they can probably readily identify the second generation just through language competence. It’s not data, but you can definitely notice that “wow, there’s like bugger all Asians who say they’re going to vote Labour – that’s not how it seems to go for the Nats” is at least indicative of where the votes lie.
Sure they could target them harder. But I gotta say from 3 years spent with a shitload of young Asian FOBs (maths degree….it’s skewed) that I am yet to encounter even one that expressed even the vaguest sympathy to Labour. The reasoning? That National is the party of business and business is good. Labour is the party of communists and they’re glad to be out from under them. It hardly matters what real differences exist in the party policy, so long as there is even a whiff that Labour are the communists they’re put off the idea like I would be put off a coffee if someone shat in it. I don’t know if that’s a view that is strongly correlated with being someone who would become an international student and not representative of the views of Asian students around the world. But it was pretty near universal here.
Second generation Asians were a different matter. Far more nuanced beliefs about NZ politics. Still massively skewed towards National, though. Mostly they cited strong parental influence there – which we know is a pretty big indicator for which way people will go.
-
TracyMac, in reply to
Still massively skewed towards National, though. Mostly they cited strong parental influence there – which we know is a pretty big indicator for which way people will go.
I’ll be interested on any stats (ha! ha!) on the heritability of voting patterns. The fact we have more political parties than we did in the 70s and obviously different returns in various elections demonstrates it’s not the whole story. And my personal experience - it'll be a cold day in hell before I vote for the Leighton Smith party (whoever he's for).
And even if second-generation Ethnicity X tends to vote a certain way, why on earth would you go out of your way to alienate them even more? On such stupid grounds?
-
BenWilson, in reply to
None of which is to say that the foreign Asian vote should be thrown under the bus. It's just to say that I wouldn't even know where to start to tap that vote for Labour. It was literally a non-starter every time. Every aspect of what Labour seems to stand for just has no appeal to the demographic.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
And even if second-generation Ethnicity X tends to vote a certain way, why on earth would you go out of your way to alienate them even more? On such stupid grounds?
Well in marketing speak I guess you'd call it segmentation. If a group is not disposed to buy your products, then a lot of effort/money can be wasted on trying to win them. You target the likely new buyers, and aim to keep the current ones loyal (that's probably even more important because they cost less to keep - so you aim to understand the drivers of "churn", what it is that they're really worried about).
Of course the problem is that this is not some abstract product that you can buy or not on whim. The product is political control itself, the bargaining of the interests of one group over another. So it is indeed very cynical. But I don't think there's any doubt that it has worked very well for National so far.
-
Sacha, in reply to
the data isn’t as robust as you’d like. On the other hand, it’s all there is.
yep. by comparison try looking for disabled people as a subgroup.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Indeed. We don't have the luxury to not make decisions based on weak information when weak information is all we've got. Because refusing to make a decision is itself a decision, and it's also based on the same weak information. You quite literally can't avoid making a hell of a lot of decisions on weak information. I'd go so far as to say most of our daily decisions are made that way. Any decision with a moderate degree of complexity sets up a research problem that can be quite colossal. But we still have to act now. Or not act, which is just a different kind of act.
What we can do to make the information better is demand it. In the meantime, we use what we have.
Stepping down from the abstract, it is a conscious decision that we make not to track the origin of the money that form the vast bulk of our nation's capital. China is nowhere near so foolish - you have to prove to them that you're a local to buy property there, and that's not a club it's easy to get into. We can say that it's a default position or something, but I don't buy into that school of thought. Land ownership is just too important to be anonymous because it literally sets the stage for our lives. It literally dictates who can do what, where. It literally has been the most hotly contested part of human resource control since the beginning of time. Of course people are interested in who is owning what, who is buying what, because it transforms the world around them. Our land is quite literally a very large part of our identity, our self-image, our aspirations, our economy, our way of life. It's not just Maori who feel that way. It's everyone on the planet who likes a roof over their head and a secure food supply.
-
Steve Curtis, in reply to
I’m fairly sure that’s not our spellchecker. I think it’ll be your American-made web browser.
Are you assuming its 'American' ,because of your belief that Americans 'spell funny'. They could be Canadians.
This meme has revealed deeper xenophobia than we thought.After all , who knew 'Australians' are the brains behind Google Maps
http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2014/03/you-are-here-the-australians-who-built-google-maps-and-changed-the-world-forever/
Post your response…
This topic is closed.