Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in “Politics”

Morrison is Hoping for an Unexpected Result in the Election, but ‘uncommitted’ Voters Seldom Change Their Minds in the Last Week

The number of voters the Coalition is trying to attract in the last days of the campaign varies, depending on how the target voters are defined. But the historical accounts of success cited by commentators do not agree. The last political statement of the party leaders in the media presentation is to build support among the voters who are not fully involved, to make the voters “gently involved” away from others, and to make those who are not yet interested in the party.

These are the polls that voters correctly classify as “don’t know”, or perhaps “don’t say”, rather than “undecided” – a category that can affect those who have expressed a choice but not used it. hand. The media will always question the effectiveness of leadership appeals. It will be difficult to explain the evidence, based on different concepts of “conviction”. The 2004 election is a key point of reference. But the evidence of early backstabbing, which is often credited with saving John Howard that year, requires careful consideration. Polls are designed to reduce the number of “don’t know”
The poll was designed with the aim of minimizing the number of “don’t know” responses. The more “uninformed” people are, the more uncertain they are about voting intentions and the more difficult it is to decide what to do with them.

Should voters ignore them because they won’t vote or vote differently? Or find another way to find out how they can vote? Fortunately, pollsters also have ways to keep the number of unknowns low. Respondents who refused to say what they intended to vote for were often asked which party they ‘leaned on’. As a result of this step, none of the polls return a “don’t know” rate higher than 7%. King Charles III May Ban Forbid Prince Harry From His Coronation if He Criticizes Queen Camilla in His Memoir

None of the voters said that the “don’t know” part was necessary before asking the “leaning” question. But the actual ratio is higher than 7%.

The best way to minimize the “unknowns” is to not record them at all. Jim Reed, who conducts the Resolve poll for the Sydney Morning Herald and the Age, insists that respondents choose party or independent: there is no ‘knowing’ allowed.

But what about respondents who seem to be “decided” but not “involved”? However, after forcing respondents to choose, Resolve asked respondents, “How firm are you in your vote?”

In its latest poll, 86% of respondents were “involved”, 14% “not involved” – a number greater than the “don’t know” reported by other polls.

Pollsters have their own way of defining potential voters who are still “playing around.” They are concerned, for example, about “backsliding” voters about Labour/Albanians or Liberal/Morrison.

The leading parties think about their voters who can come from the minority or independent parties, or between Labor and Liberal. But they also hope to convince voters who would first vote for other parties or independents, to encourage them to get their preferred bipartisan vote. A Look at the Politics of Pandemic

The number of members who want to influence is different, but higher than the first “don’t know” or “no commitment” decision. Before the Liberal political speech, the prime minister estimated that the number of voters “are undecided or choose a small group of independents” at around 25%.

Over the weekend in Australia, Dennis Shanahan put that number even higher. To those who intend to vote for small groups or independents, he explains, adding those who “go public”, gathering “at least one vote in three” .

Not Enough “Indecision” to Undermine Labour’s Progress

When the proportion of “don’t know” is low and the difference between the two chosen parties is large – as it is in some polls, but not all – the probability of “don’t know” will be different. big. In theory, Labor needs 51.8% of the bipartisan vote to win.

So even if the uninitiated combine 2:1 in support of the Coalition, that will reduce the chances of Morgan’s election from six points (47-53) to four (48-52) – not enough enough to prevent a. Many users. In Newspoll, it will be reduced to six (47-53).

A “no commitment” vote gives union members more hope. But caution is required.

It is not clear that the number of “non-participating” voters is higher now than in other elections. In fact, there have been few polls since last week it was the “non-committal” voters who turned the tide. 카지노사이트

Take 2004 With a Grain of Salt

For those who care about the storm, the 2004 election is very interesting.

In the run-up to the election with about a week to go, according to the report, Howard took Labor on the wrong foot with his forestry policy; The job shot itself in the other foot when Mark Latham, a day later, came out to grab Howard’s hand and pull Howard to him.

According to Liberal campaign manager Brian Loughnane, Latham’s hand turned out more at Liberal Party headquarters than anything else during the six-week campaign, and “gathered people’s doubts and skepticism.” has about Mark Latham”.

But the support of the Coalition was not high at the end of the campaign, but in the first few weeks. He won with a majority: 24 seats. Long before last weekend, the Coalition had already won. Whether or not ‘uncommitted’ is preventing Labor from winning this time, their role in securing Howard’s victory in 2004 is more a matter of liberal history than political science.

With the Hollywood Talent Agency Endeavor, Former Pm Johnson is in Discussions

Boris Johnson is in talks to sign up a speaking firm that counts former President Obama and tennis star Serena Williams among its high-profile clients, Sky News has learned.

Boris Johnson is in talks with one of Hollywood’s most famous talent agencies for lucrative talks after running for a second term as British Prime Minister. Sky News has learned that Mr Johnson has had detailed discussions with Endeavour, a group founded by US businessman Ari Emanuel.

Sources said the former Prime Minister, who resigned in September, had discussions with several talent agencies in recent weeks, including Endeavor and the Harry Walker Agency (HWA), one of his partners. HWA is one of the world’s leading public speakers and boasts a collection of former US Presidents. Why the Rise of Nationalist Populist Leaders Rewrites International Climate Negotiations

Clinton and Obama, ex-wife Hillary Rodham Clinton, actress Whoopi Goldberg and tennis star Serena Williams, in his book.

Mr Johnson will earn millions of pounds from his speeches after his turbulent time in Downing Street. His efforts to win enough support from his fellow MPs to replace Liz Truss, his successor, ended in failure last month. 엠카지노

Film industry sources said on Tuesday that Mr Johnson could earn tens of millions of pounds from his speech and advertising if he is successful for several years. The initial cost or any debt it incurred is unknown.

A source close to him suggested that he has no plans to embark on any television projects “in the near future”, although they did admit that he intends to hold several concerts in the coming months. Advertising
Mr. Johnson has held talks with other workers and his contract with Endeavor and HWA is not guaranteed to go through, the person added.

It is understood that Whitehall rules overseen by the Advisory Council on Professional Appointments (ACOBA) mean Mr Johnson cannot sign a deal until December. A spokesman for the former prime minister declined to comment.

Read: High School Hockey Thrives in Arizona Despite a Lack of Rinks

A Look at the Politics of Pandemic

Check for infectious diseases

hy did California and Nevada mandate stay-at-home orders, but neighboring Utah and Wyoming did not? Why did the president of the United States tell Americans that COVID “will go away. stay calm. Will it go out ‘as hospitals are fully licensed and nurses and essential workers show up outside for protective equipment like face masks? Do we need to use an anti-virus to clean our messages? Can I see my neighbor if we are outside and socially distant? Where can I buy toilet paper? Should I wear a mask outside? Are we moving the part? How much time should we spend at home working while taking care of our children and online school? Do you think we should cancel our summer vacation? Is the government doing everything it can to protect me, my family, and my country? These are the questions we, like all Americans, began to ask ourselves in March 2020. As much of America’s economy and society has moved online and at home, we have seen our lives turn upside down from due to bad disease.

As political scientists, we are particularly familiar with the politics of change. And as scholars of political process and behavior – both in the United States and around the world – we pay attention to political history and how our fellow Americans react to it. Despite suggestions that it will ‘go away’, the first reports of rising case numbers, overcrowded hospitals, isolated citizens and lockdowns from China and Italy cannot be ignored.

Realizing the impossibility of the arrival of COVID-19 in the United States, we decided to use our skills to study American attitudes and behaviors. Each of us is an expert in a different policy area: emotional and external threats of terrorism and health problems, mainly in the United States (Gadarian); citizenship and democratic threats, including immigration and electoral interference, are central to Europe (Goodman); and the economic crisis and the decline of democracy, mainly in Asia (Pepinsky).

Our interest in existentialism began to flow into the same conversation. We want to know who in America shares our concerns. We want to know if the American people will come together to fight this challenge, or if, as we fear and suspect after years of research, politics will dominate America’s response. And we understand that we can give an idea of ​​emerging problems that do not come from the echo chamber of social media or the cacophony of cable news.

Developing a large-scale research project to survey Americans about their attitudes and behaviors in response to emerging health problems is no small task. Social scientists at federal universities receive funding that differs from researchers and think tanks at polling agencies and that our research plans must be approved by an ethics board. In addition, academic researchers must receive their own funding and have an agreement with the polling agency to compile the questionnaire. This research will go out in the field, that is to our respondents. We did all this in the first two weeks of March 2020. We even wrote down our expectations in terms of what we thought we could find – in particular, that we would see differences in behavior and behavior related to COVID-19 – and shared them in the public archive. In the social sciences, this is called “pre-registration” of our research and analysis and is used to increase trust and reduce bias. With support from our ethics committee and emergency funding from the National Science Foundation under a rapid response research grant, our first study of Americans began on March 20 while we ourselves continue to work from home and that our children have started studying at a distance.

In total, we polled Americans every day six times, from March 2020 (as states began to shut down, schools went virtual, and many events were canceled) to March/April 2021 (after the inauguration of the President Joe Biden and on the recovery side of COVID. vaccine). Each wave gives us a different picture of America as the epidemic waxed and waned (see figure I.1). We can also tap into other programs that attract American audiences throughout the year. Six mental health tips for Indian millennials that really work

Questions can be asked about, for example, racial justice following the killing of George Floyd (wave 3), the challenge of opening schools (wave 4), the issue of another presidential election (wave 5) and attitudes towards vaccines (wave 6). ). An intelligent reader may look at this figure and ask why we didn’t do field research on an epidemic scale. For us, the worst time is to take the attitude before the election (wave 5) and after the dedication (wave 6) to see if the change of the part and power.

At their core, our polls are similar to public opinion polls published as part of the electoral process. They are designed to be nationally representative, which means that the respondents are chosen randomly, but in a way that makes them more or less representative of all American adults. This is important: because our respondents are a representative sample of all Americans, we can use our research to find out what Americans as a whole are thinking during this pandemic. The idea that a survey sample can be representative of the larger population is the foundation of public opinion research, and we adhere to this idea 카지노사이트.

That said, our survey differs from standard polls in two notable ways. First of all, they are larger than the standard sample: we started with three thousand people who responded to the survey in March 2020, about three times as many respondents as we see in many polls. This gives us much of what statisticians call “statistical power,” the ability to distinguish between groups of Americans with great precision. Small-scale research can help us understand all Americans, but it may not be possible to determine how small groups of Americans differ, for example, how attitudes may differ by income, race, and it is religion. To examine the complexities of Americans’ policy response to COVID-19, we need to collect data on more Americans.

Second, unlike standard polling surveys, our research follows the groups over time. This is called panel analysis. Public opinion research firms usually draw a sample of, say, 1,000 Americans to vote, then when they want to do another poll, they draw a new sample of 1,000 Americans. Our plan is to contact those we interviewed in the first round each time we conduct a new survey. In this book, we call each research process a wave of research, and our respondents are the ones we ask the most often who answer our questions. Tracking the same groups in a panel survey is more expensive and time-consuming than taking a new sample for each wave, because the research company has to call the same groups back and encourage participation.

However, this strategy gives us unprecedented insight into things like the strength or variability of beliefs and the impact of conditions (for example, the number of local COVID cases) or conditions (for example , becoming unemployed) over time. In the final wave of the survey in March/April 2021 (supported by a grant from the Russell Sage Foundation), we added a so-called “excess” item in which we interviewed non-resident respondents. white outside our panel, including 450 Black, 450 Asian American and 450 Hispanic respondents. Other respondents allow us to better understand how small communities have fared during this pandemic and their experiences with vaccines.

See: Market News Today – Are We Close to the Bottom?