Daily Review 17/08/2017

Written By: - Date published: 5:30 pm, August 17th, 2017 - 132 comments
Categories: Daily review - Tags:

Daily review is also your post.

This provides Standardistas the opportunity to review events of the day.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Don’t forget to be kind to each other …

132 comments on “Daily Review 17/08/2017”

  1. The decrypter 1

    Anything interesting happening?

  2. Sanctuary 2

    Isn’t there a poll tonight?

  3. Bearded Git 3

    Colmar Brunton:

    Nats 44
    Lab 37
    Green 4 (4.3%)
    NZF 10
    TOP 2
    MP 2

    Preferred PM Jacinda 30 Bill 30

    Greens will bounce back-some intelligent Labour people should also vote tactically if 5% is in doubt.

    • Cinny 3.1

      National continuing their downward trend

      https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/1-news-colmar-brunton-poll-greens-plummet-below-five-per-cent-jacinda-effect-keeps-labour-climbing

      The poll was conducted between August 12 and 16 with 1007 eligible voters.

    • DoublePlusGood 3.2

      Intelligent Labour, TOP and New Zealand First people should just vote for the Greens anyway, as they have better policies and better candidates.

      • Bearded Git 3.2.2

        +1000

        • lurgee 3.2.2.1

          I don’t want to vote Green this time because they’ve shown themselves to be tactically useless. But with 5% looking in doubt I think I may have to.

          • ScottGN 3.2.2.1.1

            Why? Their chances of being in government, let alone any one of them becoming a cabinet minister are shot. It’s looking more and more like the best outcome the left can hope for this election is a Lab/NZF government. We need to make Labour as strong as possible for that eventuality.

            • DoublePlusGood 3.2.2.1.1.1

              Uh, if they get into parliament, they will be needed in government.
              Lab/NZF can only get to 61/62 by themselves if the greens aren’t there so they get more seats from the reallocation of the greens votes.
              If the Greens are in, they will be needed by Labour to get to a majority. I doubt that the Greens will be in any way magnanimous about Labour trying to form a minority government with NZ first and trying to get the Greens to give them confidence and supply from outside a coalition.

      • Ad 3.2.3

        Intelligent people will vote Labour.

        • KJT 3.2.3.1

          Not if they actually care about New Zealand’s future.

          National lite needs a large helping of Greens, to keep them honest.

      • Bill 3.2.4

        Just noting that the Green Party went to 12 or 15% when Metiria spoke of welfare. Hold that in your mind if you’re bothering to read this comment.

        The media and pundits bayed for blood and the Greens then dropped in the polls (Gower’s ‘never seen before poll’ that he felt compelled to conduct – remember that?)

        That initial dip is to be expected when negative onslaughts are unleashed off the back of you having basically put a bomb under a comfortable status quo. But you weather them. You keep going. And the reaction to the manufactured negativity comes and resultant rebound comes too.

        But instead, the Green Party didn’t just come off the boil, it came off the front foot, back peddled and sat down. They lost momentum and they lost headlines, but worst of all, they left a lot of very negative perceptions hanging in the air.

        There’s no nice way to say this. They allowed the negative shit coming from msm and pundits to shape their actions, and a consequence of those defensive actions was the wave of bullshit coming from msm was suddenly unopposed and able to shape and possibly set the perceptions of many people.

        And just to help it all along, they said ‘sorry’.

        Whatever Shaw meant by apologising is irrelevant. He was talking to NZ and many have simply heard it as an apology for giving a platform to Metiria (a “lying Maori bitch” as far as much of the msm and punditry was/is concerned, in case you missed that from their “oh so subtle” coverage).

        So now the Green Party’s in trouble.

        And it’s in trouble primarily because it listened first and foremost to what media was saying and reacted to media reporting on its own impacts on general perceptions – instead of continuing to simply and diligently stand its ground and say what it had to say.

        They’ll be in government. But they’ve ceded all the high ground they occupied, and all the running they had, and so won’t be the presence in government that they really ought to be and that we (NZ in general) really need them to be.

        And yes. I want everything I’ve written in this comment to be absolutely and completely wrong.

        • ScottGN 3.2.4.1

          The Greens went to 12 or 15% when they crapped all over the MOU and went after Labour’s voters because they thought that Labour was tanking. They (like the rest of us) never imagined that Labour was even capable of or contemplating the dramatic upheaval that saw Little resign and Ardern installed as leader. They miscalculated and now they’ve made their bed (as my mother would say) and they must lie in it.

          • One Anonymous Bloke 3.2.4.1.1

            Labour’s voters

            This crap again? Labour don’t own any voters.

            • infused 3.2.4.1.1.1

              You must be sad at this result.

            • ScottGN 3.2.4.1.1.2

              Your right OAB no party ‘owns’ voters. But some (most?) voters do lend political parties their allegiance. And as we’ve seen in the last 2 weeks those bonds can be pretty strong.

              • McFlock

                Not in the polls.

                But all this bickering is based entirely on supposing what actions caused or mitigated which gain or loss, and which voters migrated from party A to party B.

                All we know is that Labour is on a roll, National are in gradual decline, NZ1 is levelling and the Greens have taken a big, but recoverable, hit.

                But the Greens run a damned good campaign.

                • ScottGN

                  Yeah even in the polls McFlock. Look how hard it’s been to shift support off National while key was in charge, poll after poll had them riding high.

                  • McFlock

                    With something like a 12 point variation in poll highs and lows this term, 17 points last term.

                    So a quarter of nat supporters even under key would drift back and forth, even if it was the same individuals each time.

          • Stuart Munro 3.2.4.1.2

            Don’t go there. Greens spoke for the folk Labour have consigned to poverty, and Labour chose Blairism with the enthusiastic support of the media plague rats, instead of following the Corbynite lead.

            Labour should have led on this issue, but unfortunately they’re the same old sellouts, chalking up victories on gender issues instead of addressing poverty and injustice.

            The polls are not to be trusted – they’re faked to license the media narrative that the failed austerity policies of the last two governments are not to be questioned.

            • greywarshark 3.2.4.1.2.1

              Stuart Munro
              Stop being so clear sighted and factual – it’s not what is good to hear and
              should only be whispered behind your hands at midnight in a dark place,
              while you are wearing funereal black.

            • red-blooded 3.2.4.1.2.2

              So, the polls were to be trusted when they showed the Greens at record highs, but they’re not to be trusted anymore..?

              The polls are not faked. We might not like them all the time, they my each have slightly different outcomes because of slightly different methodologies, and this far out they’re certainly not predictive (a lot can happen in 5 weeks), but they’re not faked. Saying that is juvenile and paranoid.

              I think the Greens will bounce back. They won’t bounce as high as they did when Labour was low, but I doubt they’ll stay this low. I do disagree with Bill (above) about why they’ve had such a tough time, though. Metiria’s announcement was always a risky strategy – the media were always going to go digging – it’s what they do. It looks like it wasn’t fully thought through. If it hadn’t been rushed, then they would have made sure they talked to people like ex flatmates, sat down and raked through her past with her for other revelations that could be distracting or undermining, and – most importantly – really made a team decision, with everyone committed to it, rather than having some caucus members uncomfortable and aggrieved. If they’d gone through a thorough process before going public, they would have either:
              1) decided not to go public with the personal story, or
              2) kept control of the story and kept the focus on the issues, knowing that there were no more layers to unpeel and that they could stick it out as a team.

              • Stuart Munro

                “The polls are not faked”

                Oh really. Remember Gower’s poll – 75% landline and 25% online – not because that’s a credible measure of anything, but because it gave him the numbers to back his fatuous story. It didn’t get much attention because RNZ got Metiria’s scalp, not Gower, but Gower’s whole statistical edifice was poppycock. That’s how debased our media are.

                You have to use statistical sampling critically to generate anything other than noise – but current pollsters have found that particular results are much more palatable than the vagaries of real sampling. These are easy to generate, much easier than getting truly representative data.

                Tell me that Gower or Hosking or Joyce are too rigorous to deliberately use compromised data – I could use a laugh.

                • red-blooded

                  We’re talking Colmar Brunton here, Stuart. It’s a regular, reputable poll. One of a number of them that are regularly reported and analysed.

                  • Stuart Munro

                    The same kind of polling that YouGov showed to be largely fallacious.

                    Small samples, selection bias, leading questions – it really isn’t difficult to not get real results.

                    These fraudulent results can then be used to justify the vigorous deployment of MSM propaganda, which, unless it is debunked will gradually erode real support and create a false consensus around an issue.

                    The YouGov polls were not a trivial element of Corbyn’s revival of Labour – they showed the pundits to be wrong and even forced the BBC to step away from their biased anti-Corbyn stance.

                    A reputable poll would need at least 2000 respondents – and pay some attention to age and income and geographical distribution to ensure the result was meaningful.

                    • red-blooded

                      Colmar Brunton do pay attention to those issues, Stuart, and the question is the same each time (“If an election was held tomorrow…?”). Plus, the sample number reflects the size of NZ’s population. I’m not a statistician (are you?), but I doubt that they’re lying about the margin of error.

                      I hope and believe that the Greens will bounce back, but that doesn’t make this poll faked or deliberately biased.

                  • Stuart Munro

                    The easiest litmus test for fake polls is whether they elide the undecided and won’t say groups to create the false impression that National enjoys support in the 40s. Because of the substantial undecided/won’t say fraction, Gnat support is in the 30s. But that makes them look like what they are – a conservative rump that only survive through intensive media life support. It’s time to pull that plug.

                    As for Colmar Brunton – polls of 750-1000 aren’t worth much more than horoscopes. YouGov used 40 000 +.

            • Carolyn_nth 3.2.4.1.2.3

              It didn’t help that one of the first things Ardern dis as leader was distance herself from Turei, a few hours after Gower said she should say she wouldn’t have Turei as a minister. Ardern did not need to do that.

              That and a couple of other things signalled to me, and probably a few others, that team Ardern would prefer NZ Furst as an ally rather than the GP. If that happens, the NZ left will be set back a couple of decades, along with those on the lowest incomes, and beneficiaries.

              It should be clear to left wingers what they should do – vote, and vote to keep the NZ left alive in parliamentary politics.

              • ScottGN

                She absolutely did need to do that Carolyn-nth. Turei’s position was deteriorating by the hour and Ardern needed a bit of space to get Labour back on an even keel.

                • Stuart Munro

                  Meh – sample the Labour Party song

                  Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
                  We’ll keep the red flag flying here.

                  She flinched.

                  • One Anonymous Bloke

                    +1

                  • red-blooded

                    So, do you really think a new government could appoint someone as a Minister who would still at that time be under active investigation by a government department to assess the extent of fraud? How would you react if a National government did that?

                    If Turei had thought things through more, she would have worked things out with MSD before going public, and there could have been a settlement in place. She didn’t. And yes, I know she needed the money at the time, but she’s got plenty of cash now and she was running a political campaign, hoping to become Minister of the department that would be investigating her.

                    Ardern didn’t flinch – she took a tough decision. She also gave Turei the chance to make her own decision and announcement.

                    Turei and the Greens championed an important cause and the choice to use her own story added authenticity, but it also had risks and negatives attached and you can’t blame people who were in no way involved in the decision to use that strategy for the outcomes of that.

                    • Stuart Munro

                      Pretty well every National minister has lied or fraudulently obtained benefits on a vastly larger scale than Metiria.

                      What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Bowing to Gower’s narrative was swallowing a massive double standard for the left.

                  • Wayne

                    Carolyn and Stuart,
                    Jacinda did what she had to do if she wants to be PM. Show she had standards and could make tough decisions.
                    The public has seen that and it has paid dividends. If you want proof ask JK. Ex PMs like Bolger, Clark and Key, all of whom won three elections, know at a very intimate level just what is required to be a successful PM. Making tough decisions on instinct without a lot of endless reflection is one of the essential attributes. I have seen enough of each of them, especially Bolger and Key since I was in the same party, of how they actually make such decisions.
                    My sense of Ardern both from interacting with her in Parliament and also since (PACDAC) is that she instantly knew Meritia, as the issue unraveled, could not be in Cabinet.

                    • Stuart Munro

                      Wayne – you are so utterly corrupt your opinion is worthless.

                      John Key is the worst Prime Minister New Zealand has ever had – one does not achieve the most expensive housing, the worst homelessness, and the highest suicide rates in the OECD without being the worst government in the OECD.

                      That’s what you were – for heaven’s sake take some responsibility!

                    • Jacinda did what she had to do if she wants to be PM. Show she had standards and could make tough decisions.

                      Nope. Showed that she doesn’t have a spine and will kowtow to the RWNJs Dirty Politics.

                      The public has seen that and it has paid dividends.

                      Nope. IMO, it’s just that she’s more charismatic than Little.

                      All the rest is just Bandwagon Effect.

                  • Nick

                    She didn’t flinch. Turei pulled the pin from the grenade, held on to it tightly and blew herself up…. Jacinda wisely stepped back a safe distance.

                • KJT

                  Adern had a chance to show her true colours.

                  And she did.

                  Even Key thinks she is a safe pair of hands, for the rich.

                  • red-blooded

                    And a cynical person would say that that’s exactly the kind of doubt that he wants to sow in our minds… Yes, really, that nice Mr Key – it’s just possible that he’s got his own motivations for his public statements.

                    • Stuart Munro

                      Indeed – that is the effect he wanted. Labour played into his paws.

                      There is more than could be said, which I won’t, if you stop trying to pin the blame for this on Metiria. She was doing her job.

                    • adam

                      Come on Stuart Munro, you must of worked out by now that red-blooded is a hard right hack for the labour party.

                    • red-blooded []

                      Piss off, adam. If you see the Labour Party as hard right then your judgement is so skewed as to be worthless.

                      I’m a secondary school teacher and I have a lifetime of volunteering in fair trade groups, unions, social support groups, international charities and environmental groups, women’s groups, public education lobby groups… if that’s your view of hard Right then that says more about you than me.

                    • Stuart Munro

                      @ Adam – no he’s not. A lot of Labour supporters have managed not to get too badly burnt by their party’s actions. They are good people and expect the best of their party, as I used to. Snuggling up to decaying sacs of flesh like Gower will damage Labour in the long term however, and do little to alleviate the distress of those impoverished by the failures of neo-liberalism.

                    • adam

                      So red-blooded and I’ve asked this from you before, where is the socialist economic policy from the labour party?

                      You know, left wing economic policy.

                      None, well bugger me – what else is new.

                      You lot have a coup, go up in the polls and then lord it over the rest of the left.

                      So let me rephrase my argument, red-blooded is just another authoritarian labour party hack. Who like everyone else in that party struggles to work with others, Astrturfs, and would rather loss an election (the last one does come to mind) rather than share power with a left wing party.

                      Mind you, in historical context. The liberal party in NZ was very much the same. I’m sure people who were the wet’s in there day, were very much the same.

        • Carolyn_nth 3.2.4.2

          Aren’t you a bit premature to blame the GP?

          My understanding is that trends tend not to show up til at least several weeks after an event. James Shaw made that “not so great together” speech at the relaunch on Sunday 13 Aug. This latest released poll result was conducted from 12-16 Aug,

          • red-blooded 3.2.4.2.1

            Trends take more than one poll to show them – that’s what makes them trends. A single poll can certainly show a reaction to a major event or series of events, though. Again, people here were perfectly happy to interpret the poll that put the Greens so high after their conference as a reaction to Metiria’s speech…

            • Carolyn_nth 3.2.4.2.1.1

              I usually dont make much comment on polls. I tend to comment more on the narratives people derive from them – often the MSM tend to make very slanted headlines.

              In my comment at 8.04pm above, I was responding to Bill’s comment in which cited some words spoken by James Shaw. As those words were in James Shaw’s speech at the GP relaunch Sunday pm, they were spoken a day and a half into the Colmar Brunton polling period – which was 12-16 August. So I doubt that speech would be the main cause of the poll drop for the GP.

              My understanding is that poll watchers say it takes a few weeks for any single event to show in a poll, as well as for a change in trends. But I could be wrong.

              I don’t recall ever making a comment about that 15% GP poll (on or offline).

              • red-blooded

                I don’t think I said that you had commented about that 15%poll, CN. I hadn’t checked back, so I just said “people”. For an example, look at Bill’s comment (3.4.2.2). There was a lot of rejoicing on this site about that poll and no talk then about time delays – a direct link was made between the conference speech and the lift in the poll. I just think we have to be consistent.

                And, Bill, the media were the ones who delivered that speech of Metiria’s to the wider public. Somehow, that part of things was OK but not the follow-up work..?

                The media were always going to dig and look for another angle on the story – that’s what they do. Turei knew this – she’s been a politician long enough to know how it works. Sorry, but while I admired the message, I still think there was some rushed and/or shoddy thinking and a lack of prep with other interested parties (including the Greens’ caucus).

          • Bill 3.2.4.2.2

            If Shaw’s words are out of kilter with the time line then fine. The fact still remains that the Green Party went up off the back of Metiria launching the welfare policy.

            And then msm set to business.

            And unlike other examples I can think of, the Greens didn’t (or didn’t manage to) hold their ground against negative msm messaging.

        • KJT 3.2.4.3

          Not really correct Bill.

          The media showed their partisanship and bad faith by misrepresenting and mis reporting the Green reaction.

          It is obvious now, that blackmail, is going to be the right wing response to anyone, who tries to do anything serious about poverty.

    • Ad 3.3

      Five weeks for the Greens to figure this out.

      Meanwhile, what would a Labour-NZFirst government look like?
      (With a little side dish of Greens)

    • McFlock 3.4

      Dunno how “intelligent” you’d have to be, but helping the Greens is a good idea for leftists.

      I’d certainly be tempted to vote Green to help them over the line.

      As it is, I reckon that this is the low point and they’ll be in Parliament in October.

      The important bit from this poll is National down 3%. Might be statistacl error, but when you’re that close to the margin the odds are that it’s something to look at.

      • Bearded Git 3.4.1

        It’s amazing how many people can’t bring themselves to vote tactically….but I reckon the Greens will end up with 8% when the dust settles.

        This poll taken at the Greens nadir, probably on purpose.

        • red-blooded 3.4.1.1

          Don’t be daft. There’s been a lot happening in politics in recent weeks and we’re building up to an election – it’s hardly surprising that a poll’s been conducted.

          When the poll that showed the Greens so high was published, was that “on purpose”, too? If so, whose purpose?

          • Bearded Git 3.4.1.1.1

            mmmm call me cynical but it is very much in the interests of the Right to portray a vote for the Greens as a wasted vote. But you could be right.

    • mauī 3.5

      New Zealand has a Trudeau election.

      • ScottGN 3.5.1

        Indeed. Apart from the timing of the leadership change (Trudeau had a year and a bit as Opposition Leader before the elections) the parallels are striking.

    • Xanthe 3.6

      Greens are out for 2017
      They have pursued devisive short term campaiging for too long. A spell out of parliement *may* bring them to their senses. I hope so !

  4. Timbeau 4

    Colmar Brunton leans right, a touch, doesn’t it? Need Roy Morgan, where Greens often are overstated, to get wider picture

    • lprent 4.1

      At this point in the electoral cycle, they tend to overstate National by about 4% in my opinion. They also understate the minor parties. Their Labour value is bounces around a bit.

      I think that they have some weird population that they sample from. I’d imagine that it is like getting the Auckland sample exclusively from the North Shore or Epsom.

      • Anne 4.1.1

        I’ve lived on the Shore for the past 32 years and they’ve never rung me. 🙁

      • Bearded Git 4.1.2

        I think I heard the Colmar Brunton guy say on RNZ this morning that they still don’t ring cellphones. They still just ring landlines but correct for age bands and other factors.

        Also the TV1 report on the Colmar Brunton poll said that “undecided votes had fallen by 7%” but they didn’t say from what to what.

    • Anne 4.2

      Colmar Brunton leans right, a touch, doesn’t it?

      Yes, and it has consistently over-estimated the number of Nat voters – at least in comparison to other public polling companies. I think you can safely assume that the more likely percentage of Nat voters at any given time averages around 2% less.

      That would mean the difference between Nat. and Lab is currently around 5%.

      • JamieB 4.2.1

        How about the significant margin the poll overestimated Labour suppirt at the 2014 election?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 4.2.1.1

          Their Labour value … bounces around a bit.

          Lprent, two hours before you, four comments up the page.

          Overstating National ≠ understating Labour.

    • ScottGN 5.1

      That’s if Flavell hold Waiariki. If he doesn’t then on the poll tonight 8% will be wasted and redistributed to National, Labour and NZFirst.

    • weka 5.2

      Unless Peters chooses National.

      • Ad 5.2.1

        A month ago Labour were finished.

        If NZ F went in with National, all good for a term.

        • weka 5.2.1.1

          Unless Peters chooses National 😉

        • Muttonbird 5.2.1.2

          What are you talking about? The mess these guys are creating will be much more difficult to retrieve in three years time. Social issues will worsen. Infrastructure issues will worsen, the list goes on.

          Can’t really believe you could be that callous toward the vulnerable in this country that you’d just shrug and say, ‘oh well, next time’.

        • Draco T Bastard 5.2.1.3

          A NZFirst/National coalition won’t last a term. the two are more diametrically opposed than Nats/Labour.

      • ScottGN 5.2.2

        That’s always been a distinct possibility. If anything though, this poll lessens the likelihood of that outcome since Winston won’t have to deal with the Greens.

  5. ScottGN 6

    Hopefully Swordfish will be along soon with the stats. But I seem to recall that the last Colmar-Brunton before the 2014 election slightly overstated National, understated the Greens a bit and had Labour about right?

  6. Anne 7

    Colmar Brunton leans right, a touch, doesn’t it?

    Yes, and it has consistently over-estimated the number of Nat voters – at least in comparison to other public polling companies. I think you can safely assume that the more likely percentage of Nat voters at any given time averages around 2% less.

    That would mean the difference between Nat. and Lab is currently around 5%.

  7. Pete 8

    Farrar petulant with “Metiria and Jacinda have killed the Greens between them. Proof girls can do anything! ”

    A slimy toad that is peed off is not a pretty thing.

    • McFlock 8.1

      Slimy toad piss at the sewer? 🙂

    • Muttonbird 8.2

      The Nats will still use that Dirty Politics worm even if they are turfed out of office next month but their war chest will diminish and their ability to poll will also.

      He must be shitting himself.

  8. Muttonbird 9

    It will probably do the Greens some good to go out of parliament for a term. No better way to really get focussed.

    They have been naive in the face of the white, RWNJ, bene-bashing rump of NZ which is a formidable force and very large.

    They’ll grow from this.

    • In Vino 9.1

      You actually believe that the Greens do not have a +5% base??
      More reliable than this poll, I think.

      • Muttonbird 9.1.1

        I think they probably do but I’m saying they might learn more with a term outside parliament than if they scrape in just over the 5%.

        • In Vino 9.1.1.1

          Well, if they scrape in I will be surprised. I think they will fly in. This poll is temporary rubbish.

          • Muttonbird 9.1.1.1.1

            I think they’ll pick up significantly too.

            I think they can be both an environment party and a social justice party but they need to think hard about their delivery. In the last month they have screwed up their social justice policy and Labour is getting all the press on the environment. Even the Nats farted about an electric car for the government fleet when the Greens were preoccupied.

            • In Vino 9.1.1.1.1.1

              The Greens’ “preoccupation” was somewhat engineered by hysterical media.
              Fortunately, we have weeks to go. But it strikes me as a funny pattern. Last election the most left-wing party was Te Mana. Slaughtered by the media because they unwisely hooked up with KDC..
              This time the Greens are the most left-wing party. History repeating itself?
              Greens must play very carefully from now on.

              • Carolyn_nth

                yep. The mainstream media like a centrist Labour-led government if they don’t have a National-led one. They tend to demonise people and parties solidly left.

              • red-blooded

                Did the media make Mana hook up with KDC..? No, they decided to take the money, and people decided their fine words were not to be trusted.

                • In Vino

                  Just as the media told you, darling. You go barely ankle-deep.

                  • red-blooded

                    So what are you questioning here, sweetie pie?
                    1) Hone decided to take the money. Tick.
                    2) Surely if people DID trust him, they’d have elected him? And yet they didn’t… And don’t blame the media – Mana had plenty of money to get their message out, it just didn’t ring true.

                    Hone is incredibly self-serving. Last time, he took the money and thought he could buy his way back into parliament. This time, he’s hooked up again with the Māori Party, despite supposedly seeing them as sell-outs for going with the Nats. Plus, he’s been telling lies about Willy Jackson (saying he supports people voting for Hone over Kelvin Davis – something Jackson absolutely refutes) and trying to get Labour to gift him a seat.

                    Sue Bradford got it right when she walked away from Mana.

                    • weka

                      “Surely if people DID trust him, they’d have elected him? And yet they didn’t”

                      Actually TTT was pretty close.

                    • red-blooded

                      Reply to weka,: “pretty close” still isn’t “elected”.

                    • In Vino

                      But that is a moronic attitude. A beats B by one vote in an electorate of thousands, and you use that thin pretext to condemn the guy who lost by one vote as utterly useless.
                      Grow up, simpleton.

      • I don’t believe the claim is real.

  9. weka 10

    What’s the received wisdom on time between an event and how it shows up in voter patterns? I thought it was a couple of weeks but is it different during an election when interest is higher?

    • Anne 10.1

      @ weka
      In terms of major policy planks, it used to be said that it took two months to be disseminated and assimilated by the majority of punters. But when you have the kind of seismic political changes we have seen these past few weeks, I’m picking its around two weeks before the full impact is felt.

      If I’m right, the Greens have bottomed out and should be on the rise again by the end of this week. 🙂

  10. Glenn 11

    “Teenagers jumping out of police cars just because they can”.

    I think Bills lost it.

    • ScottGN 11.1

      I thought that too, it was a really weird thing to say.

      • AB 11.1.1

        He started the sentence without knowing how he was going to finish it – scary feeling for anyone but with someone as innately dull and authoritarian as Bill it can’t end well.

    • In Vino 11.2

      Along with Winston, who sounded pretty poor to me on RNZ this morning?

  11. ScottGN 12

    It doesn’t have any to do with policy at the moment though does it? It’s all about personality at the moment, and 1 person’s personality at that. This poll won’t even have captured her savvy, assured handling of the unhinged attack form Julie Bishop which even had Mark Richardson (yes him!) whispering on The Project last night that she looked pretty prime ministerial.

  12. ScottGN 13

    Jesus Steven Joyce is even making an appearance on The Project. All hands on deck for the Nats as the ships lists dangerously.

  13. weka 14

    Some of the Green MPs are doing an AMA on reddit this evening.

    Gareth Hughes,

    Thanks for the question – yes, of course we weren’t happy about the poll tonight but also not surprised we dropped. As James has said the last few weeks we haven’t been that great and we haven’t been that together. We care deeply about our issues and we are going to work hard to turn this around. We’ve reset our campaign, refocused our priorities to clean rivers, ending poverty and tackling climate change and we’re going to give this campaign everything we have. We’re going to be telling people with so many important issues facing our country we need Greens in Parliament and Greens in the next progressive Government.

    • weka 14.1

      Kia ora koutou – I’m sure everyone would like to know how you plan build the party back after today’s poll. I appreciate it’s only one poll but to be so low for the first time in so long has to ring some alarm bells.

      How will you rebound and what’s the plan for the future of the leadership, in particular?

      ________

      [–]GarethMPGareth Hughes MP – Verified 5 points 16 minutes ago

      Thanks for the question – I answered it above in the thread and yes, it is one poll but we are taking it seriously. I can give you one example. In previous elections we have only directly contacted a small number of voters, we have some pretty ambitious contact targets that we are on track to achieve with most of the campaign gone. We have re-jigged our leadership team and have Marama Davison leading on ending poverty, Julie Anne-Genter on tackling climate change and Eugenie Sage on cleaning up our rivers. We also have record membership, donations and volunteers so know our fundamentals are strong. We are in the campaign of our lifetimes. On leadership, we will elect a new female co-leader July next year (that’s the benefit of a co-leadership model) and I think James is doing a fantastic job representing our values and vision in public. Cheers

  14. infused 15

    With Green’s tanking, NZF will go with Labour. It’s pretty simple. I don’t think the polls are going to move much more than they are at now.

    • ScottGN 15.1

      I think National could go a bit lower yet infused, maybe 39 to 42%. Colmar Brunton does tend to overestimate their support. And Ardern could push Labour to 40. I agree though that a Lab/NZF government is rapidly becoming the most likely outcome of this election. I also think the Greens will comfortably clear the 5% threshold but be under 8%.

      • infused 15.1.1

        Maybe… but I don’t think so. I reckon movements will be within +/- 2%. Even though Nationals support has gone down, it’s been pretty solid throughout.

        I think Greens will pass 5%, just.

        • ScottGN 15.1.1.1

          UMR already had National drifting down towards 42 before most of the drama unfolded. Their problem, of course, is a lack of options. Especially if Dunne loses and the Māori Party lose Waiariki.

          • In Vino 15.1.1.1.1

            I think there is quite some time to go yet, and the polls will move. But how much will that movement be manipulated by guess who?

    • Stuart Munro 15.2

      Of all the follies in NZ politics, claiming to understand what Winston Peters will do may be the greatest.

  15. Muttonbird 16

    You have to laugh. The three witches; Young, Trevett, and Watkins are all terrified and framing their articles from Macbeth’s English’s point of view.

    • lurgee 16.1

      You seem to have an unhealthy fixation on those three, and have made some rather unpleasant comments about Trevett’s appearance in the past. Is mocking a woman’s appearance okay if you don’t like her?

      • Muttonbird 16.1.1

        You’re being a bit sensitive. I do have an unhealthy fixation on them but that is because they are not neutral and I expect better from senior journalists.

        Trevett’s profile picture drives me nuts because she has an oily face in it so I call her ‘the oily one’ – it’s just a fact. I also call Steven Joyce ‘cone head’ because he has a cone head – a fact again.

        My mockery is not gender specific.

  16. If election held today with only those polled oh dear that would be a shocker for the Greens. But that isn’t the case therefore it is just nothing on top of nil with some zero added in. Double down on EVERYTHING and let’s send the gnats hopping.

    • weka 17.1

      Lol, imagine if NZ was run on the basis of what 1,000 people said.

      • KJT 17.1.1

        Actually run on the basis of what 61 people in Parliament, plus a few “Journalists” say.

        Note the headlines were not. “Greens down in the polls tonight”. They were “Greens out of Parliament”. Which is unlikely, and not true, at this stage.

  17. Labour will shit in . No probs.

    Tough luck to all the rightie’s .

    But to reinforce the lines I will no longer give my vote to Labour , but to the Greens. Which is a pity because for the first time in 30 odd years I was going to vote Labour, dang it !

    But the name of the game is to get rid of National and Labour will need their support partners, so every little drop in the bucket is important.

    • Bearded Git 18.1

      Agreed Wild Katipo-the Left needs the Greens, indeed the Left has often been the Greens over the last 9 years.

  18. Exkiwiforces 19

    Here’s something for the Greenies and us closet Greenies or anyone else interested in the environment especially Antarctica.

    http://www.news.com.au/world/chinas-secret-threat-to-australias-antarctic-claim-report-reveals/news-story/d88ca4389f7d621f5b50d529954de68d

    • China is getting very aggressive in its acquisitiveness.

      • Exkiwiforces 19.1.1

        It sure is ATM and I’m thinking they pegged out their claim when the Antarctic Treaty comes up for renewal around 2020 I believe? There is evidence ATM to suggest that China is also under reporting (also using its soft aid to pay off officials or provide cheap loans/ aid for projects with strings attached) the fish being caught by its own fishing trawlers only in the South West Pacific, but in the Southern Ocean as well.

        Running off my iPad atm, but I’ll find the a link I post here sometime ago about Chinese over fishing/ underreporting of their catches in the South Pacific and how the likes of NZ, Oz, the Yanks and French who the bulk of Maritime Fisheries Patrols in the region are having problems in co-ord some of the maritime patrols with of small nations within the South Pacific .

  19. mosa 20

    The Natz are hell bent on the TPPA and its another good reason why we need a change in government.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA1708/S00338/mcclay-government-approves-tpp11-mandate.htm

  20. Cantabrian 21

    Ardern should gift Wellington Central to James Shaw if the polls stay this tight. It could mean not having to put up with NZF in government. As time goes on and Labour’s vote creeps over 40% (and I think it will), National’s vote will start reducing in turn. Who needs Winston?

    • weka 21.1

      Labour need to grow their vote from NZF. Because as the GP recovers they will pick up Labour voters again.

      Or, it’s all a nonsense anyway 😉

      btw, in 2014 Robertson got nearly 20,000 votes, Shaw got 5,000. I think there are probably other electorates that the GP could do better in. Were you thinking Labour could withdraw Robertson? Hard to imagine them doing that given his seniority, and Labour’s position on standing in every seat (and L/G agreement not to do deals).

Recent Comments

Recent Posts