国产bbaaaaa片,成年美女黄网站色视频免费,成年黄大片,а天堂中文最新一区二区三区,成人精品视频一区二区三区尤物

首頁(yè)> 外文OA文獻(xiàn) >A Bark But No Bite : Inequality and the 2014 New Zealand General Election
【2h】

A Bark But No Bite : Inequality and the 2014 New Zealand General Election

機(jī)譯：吠不但不能咬人：不平等與2014年新西蘭大選

代理獲取
本網(wǎng)站僅為用戶(hù)提供外文OA文獻(xiàn)查詢(xún)和代理獲取服務(wù)，本網(wǎng)站沒(méi)有原文。下單后我們將采用程序或人工為您竭誠(chéng)獲取高質(zhì)量的原文，但由于OA文獻(xiàn)來(lái)源多樣且變更頻繁，仍可能出現(xiàn)獲取不到、文獻(xiàn)不完整或與標(biāo)題不符等情況，如果獲取不到我們將提供退款服務(wù)。請(qǐng)知悉。
  • 摘要
  • 著錄項(xiàng)
  • 相似文獻(xiàn)
  • 相關(guān)主題

摘要

Based on New Zealand Election Study (NZES) data from a sample of 2,830 eligible voters, A Bark But No Bite explores a puzzle. While there was a lot of talk about inequality before the 2014 general election in New Zealand, and during the campaign, concern about inequality appeared to have no tangible effect on the election outcome. This book shows that, by its attention to the concerns of middle ground voters, the National Government had reduced the potential of policy differences to drive voter choices. Perceptions of competence and effective leadership were National’s strongest suit, crowding out voter concerns over matters of policy. When voters did consider policy, inequality and related concerns were second to the economy. Traditional priorities about health and education, and perceptions of party differences on these matters, had faded into the background. Meanwhile, voters doubted the opposition Labour Party’s ability to govern effectively in an alternative coalition to that of the National-led government. Labour’s policies were too many. In various ways, they would have chipped away at inequality, but lacked a coherent narrative and presentation. This book confirms that Labour’s proposal to increase the age for receipt of New Zealand superannuation gained Labour no new votes. Hopes that the ‘missing million’ people who failed to turn out to vote in 2011 would vote in 2014 and give an advantage to the left were unfulfilled. A comprehensive study of the 2014 election, this book provides a detailed account of all these findings, and a host of others.
機(jī)譯：根據(jù)來(lái)自2,830名合格選民的樣本的新西蘭選舉研究（NZES）數(shù)據(jù)，“一無(wú)所有”就探索了一個(gè)難題。盡管在2014年新西蘭大選之前和競(jìng)選期間有很多關(guān)于不平等的討論，但人們對(duì)不平等的擔(dān)憂(yōu)似乎對(duì)選舉結(jié)果沒(méi)有實(shí)質(zhì)影響。這本書(shū)表明，國(guó)民政府通過(guò)關(guān)注中間地帶選民的關(guān)注，減少了政策分歧推動(dòng)選民選擇的可能性。對(duì)能力和有效領(lǐng)導(dǎo)能力的看法是美國(guó)國(guó)家半導(dǎo)體的最強(qiáng)訴求，這使選民對(duì)政策問(wèn)題的關(guān)注排擠出了第一位。當(dāng)選民考慮政策時(shí)，不平等和相關(guān)問(wèn)題僅次于經(jīng)濟(jì)。有關(guān)健康和教育的傳統(tǒng)優(yōu)先事項(xiàng)以及對(duì)黨派在這些問(wèn)題上的分歧的認(rèn)識(shí)已逐漸淡出背景。同時(shí)，選民對(duì)反對(duì)黨工黨有效執(zhí)政的能力表示懷疑，這種能力是由國(guó)民黨領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的政府的替代聯(lián)盟。工黨的政策太多了。他們會(huì)以各種方式消除不平等，但缺乏連貫的敘述和表述。這本書(shū)證實(shí)了工黨提出的增加新西蘭退休金領(lǐng)取年齡的提議沒(méi)有獲得工黨的新票。未能實(shí)現(xiàn)2011年未能投票的“百萬(wàn)失蹤者”會(huì)在2014年投票并給左派有利的希望沒(méi)有實(shí)現(xiàn)。這本書(shū)是對(duì)2014年大選的全面研究，詳細(xì)介紹了所有這些發(fā)現(xiàn)以及許多其他發(fā)現(xiàn)。

著錄項(xiàng)

相似文獻(xiàn)

  • 外文文獻(xiàn)
  • 中文文獻(xiàn)
  • 專(zhuān)利
代理獲取

客服郵箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公網(wǎng)安備：11010802029741號(hào) ICP備案號(hào)：京ICP備15016152號(hào)-6 六維聯(lián)合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司?版權(quán)所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服務(wù)號(hào)