Gap closes in latest Fairfax

Written By: - Date published: 9:01 am, September 28th, 2011 - 56 comments
Categories: election 2011, labour, national, polls - Tags:

Despite the incessant media drumbeat about incipient doom and gloom, Labour’s loyal support base refuses to lie down and die. The latest Fairfax poll has the gap with National closing a bit. Labour is up from 25.7 last month to 28.1, the Nats are down by nearly 3 points to 54.3.

Checking the media narrative is just about the only bright spot in this result of course, that’s still a huge and depressing gap. Watkins and Small sum up:

But as [National’s] support parties look increasingly sick and dark clouds gather over the economies of Europe and the United States, National is banking on a mood for stability overcoming history and potentially even giving it the numbers to govern alone.

Perish the thought! A week is a long time in politics.

56 comments on “Gap closes in latest Fairfax ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. One Anonymous Bloke 1
    28 September 2011 at 9:18 am

    http://horizonpoll.co.nz/page/154/horizonpoll 25th September 2011

    “This provides the current National led coalition with 46.2%, a potential Labour-Green-New Zealand First coalition with 45%.”

  2. Jim Nald 2
    28 September 2011 at 9:32 am

    “National banking on a mood for stability …”

    Huh??? “Stability”?? What stability?
    Most of the lives of people I know have been rocked directly by the government of the past 2.5 years or indirectly as a result of their incompetence at responding to natural or external issues.

    This is the lot in power that has been squandering the resilience we had since they got in. Tax cuts – $50 – northward of $50 – pfftt – and they said that as they were nudging and winking at their mates and not at us. And they borrowed to put us in more debt.

    Challenge the stupid donkey’s claim to stability. Stability of what really? Stability for who?

    • queenstfarmer 2.1
      28 September 2011 at 9:41 am

      Huh??? “Stability”?? What stability?

      Stability of a returning incumbent government, led by NZ’s most popular PM ever.

      Versus what would undoubtedly be the “coalition from hell” of Labour + Greens + NZ First + possibly Hone and / or Maori MPs.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1.1
        28 September 2011 at 9:43 am

        That’s not stability it’s continuity. Continuity of incompetence.

        • Bored 2.1.1.1
          28 September 2011 at 10:02 am

          Its actually a poisoned chalice…financial wreckage coming up worldwide on the back of the Euro crisis which is going to lead to massive defaults and bankruptcies across the whole financial sector.

          Those nice NZers who wish for stability and continuity, (read certainty) stand to lose the major chunk of their “property” (shares / bank deposits). Those who live the “aspirational” dream with the huge mortgage to cover house and brand new 4WD with mag wheels can look forward to repo men coming round.

      • Bored 2.1.2
        28 September 2011 at 11:16 am

        Be honest QSF, what you are really talking about is swapping one set of right inclined kleptocratic incompetent fools with a left inclined set kleptocratic incompetent fools. Its all just down to who will gift who’s dosh to their side whilst doing f.a.(or even being cognoscent) about the real state of the world. Also seems to me you actually believe it will make an iota of difference.

        • queenstfarmer 2.1.2.1
          28 September 2011 at 11:23 am

          Well actually I was talking about not swapping the current lot, but only to address the point of stability.

          Jim asked “what stability?”, so I made the objective (and obviously correct) observation that the current Govt returned would be more stable than a multi-party coalition, particularly involving Winston Peters (who has managed to fall out with every Govt he’s been involved with).

          • mikesh 2.1.2.1.1
            28 September 2011 at 11:37 am

            The only government Winston fell out with was Jenny Shipley’s; and that was over the issue of asset sales, his opposition to which has been pretty consistent over the years.This is unlikely to be a source of instability in any future government.

        • higherstandard 2.1.2.2
          28 September 2011 at 11:25 am

          I agree completely – but you must admit it is hilarious watching everyone defend their team whilst vilifying the other team when they are just different sides of the same coin.

      • Irascible 2.1.3
        28 September 2011 at 3:01 pm

        Arguing that a finger puppet known only for smiling, waving, scuttling and running off to his official residence in Hawaii is “stability” is akin to arguing that Brash & Banks are intellectual giants.
        Stability requires policies and planning for the future of the country of which NZ has seen neither from the NACT government.

      • swordfish 2.1.4
        28 September 2011 at 4:56 pm

        “…..a returning incumbent government, led by NZ’s most popular PM ever.”

        Which is, of course, Complete and Utter Bollocks !

        You, Big Bruv and various other assorted Nacts just keep on pushing this bullshit. How many times do we have to explain ? Key is no more popular than Clark was.
        Either you know you’re talking bollocks or, tragically, you’ve allowed The Herald to hopelessly confuse you. About a year ago, The Herald Digi Poll took the unprecedented step of presenting its ‘Preferred PM’ stats solely on the basis of DECIDED respondents. Hence, Key’s support suddenly shot up overnight from early 50s to 70%.

        All other major polls continue to include the (considerable number of) UNDECIDEDs/DONT KNOWS/NONE OF THE ABOVES. And, in these, Key remains in the 50s.

        Simple, really.

        But, you probably still don’t get it.

        • Big bruv 2.1.4.1
          28 September 2011 at 5:05 pm

          Settle down Swordfish, take a deep breath and calm down.

          Now, you may not like it but the fact is that John Key is indeed the most popular PM this nation has ever had, he is far more popular than Clark ever was.

          Deal with it and move on Swordfish, you would be far better to ask why he is popular than to argue the facts.

            • lprent 2.1.4.1.1.1
              28 September 2011 at 5:25 pm

              r0b: Don’t confuse the wee bruv with facts.

              You know how that confuses him because he really can’t distinguish between those and the bullshit. He always disappears for a while after being told that his beliefs are bollocks. Presumably he heads back to the font of all bullshit at the sewer until his existential faith is restored that ideas he gets out of his navel fluff are reality.

              I can’t bear to be without his idiocy for so long… (WTF!) Umm something wrong there. Actually I can – lay it on.

              😈

          • swordfish 2.1.4.1.2
            28 September 2011 at 5:21 pm

            Calm down, Big Bruv. You’re getting hysterical again. I’m gonna have to have a serious talk with your Father if this over-excitement continues, young man ! Do you seriously want to be grounded for the next fortnight, Big Bruv ? No ? Thought not, young man.

            Oh, and on Clark vs Key: see my comment below, sweet-pea.

        • swordfish 2.1.4.2
          28 September 2011 at 5:16 pm

          Incidently, in this latest Fairfax Poll, Key is down 4 percentage points to 51% – barely half of New Zealanders (you know, as opposed to “NZ’s most popular PM ever !, ever !, ever !, in the whole, entire history of the Universe !!!”).

          Even in her least popular term as PM (2005-2008), Clark was still occassionally receiving more than 51% support as preferred PM.

        • queenstfarmer 2.1.4.3
          28 September 2011 at 5:33 pm

          If that is the case, then it’s a fair point. I don’t know the detail of the polling methodology that you apparently do.

          Given these apparent vagaries of polling, I will err on the side of caution and say that John Key is one of the most popular PMs in NZ history.

          • swordfish 2.1.4.3.1
            29 September 2011 at 3:36 pm

            Very reasonable of you, queenstfarmer. In fact, so much so that I entirely take back my hyperventilating tone.

        • Deadly_NZ 2.1.4.4
          28 September 2011 at 8:43 pm

          And judging by his performance in the house he must be reading and believing said polls…. And you know what happens to people who only read the good stuff and ignore the bad… Crash and Burn time.

  3. millsy 3
    28 September 2011 at 10:10 am

    Give it up.

    Labour is heading for its biggest election defeat since the war and there is nothing we can do about it, no matter how hard you spin it. That is the reality.

    For the past 4 years, National have led Labour by at least 15-20 points, and there is nothing that has happened to change it.

    This could very well last for a generation or more.

    • Colonial Viper 3.1
      28 September 2011 at 10:27 am

      This could very well last for a generation or more.

      Hmmmm. How long ago was it that English led National to a historic defeat?

      Seems to me it took National less than a decade to go from Zero to Hero.

      Labour needs to remake itself. 6-7% general unemployment and 25% plus youth unemployment and it still can’t connect with the electorate. Ask some hard questions, Labour dudes.

      • Zaphod Beeblebrox 3.1.1
        28 September 2011 at 11:12 am

        Labour mainly need to get their demographic (young, wage earners) to 1. enrol 2. turn up on the day and vote. Its voter apathy with the alternative they are prposing that is the problem.

        • higherstandard 3.1.1.1
          28 September 2011 at 11:28 am

          Labour don’t need to do anything apart from wait till the electorate gets bored with Key and National and vote national out.

          I would prefer that labour was a strong and competent opposition which makes parliament function more soundly but unfortunately this opposition is cak like the opposition before it just like this government is cak like the government before it.

          • Zaphod Beeblebrox 3.1.1.1.1
            28 September 2011 at 11:49 am

            They actually need some younger and more energetic MPs. Look at some of the faces on the backbench during question time- they seem bored and happy just be picking up their pay check.

            The look at some of the Greens MPs. They seem to have a lot more fire in their bellies. Even Kennedy Graham.

        • AAMC 3.1.1.2
          28 September 2011 at 11:48 am

          ‘Those who grasp that the crisis is transforming politics will shape its future’

          http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/sep/21/radical-action-drag-economy-brink?cat=commentisfree&type=article

          If the Left can’t dominate the narrative with markets collapsing, uneploymemt and inequality out of control, Neo-Liberal theory disproven beyond doubt, Wall St occupied, unrest throughout Europe, drought and floods compromising food security, etc etc… they don’t deserve our vote.

          There has to be a way to get their message out there, I appreciate the media is complicit, so find other means.

          • Big bruv 3.1.1.2.1
            28 September 2011 at 12:50 pm

            The media is complicit?

            What world do you live in?, the media is a stinking morass of left wing pinko’s who do nothing more than parrot the left’s agenda.

            Do the names Fa’afoi and Mould mean nothing to you guys?

            • AAMC 3.1.1.2.1.1
              28 September 2011 at 1:12 pm

              You seriously need you head examined, and should stop watching Fox News.

              Of the media isn’t complicit, why when the Tea party turn up anywhere is it so heavily covered, and yet still nothing on #occupywallstreet?

              Your blind faith is good for a laugh though Big Bruv!

            • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.2.1.2
              28 September 2011 at 5:51 pm

              What world do you live in?, the media is a stinking morass of left wing pinko’s who do nothing more than parrot the left’s agenda.

              Cripes, first time I heard News World, Fairfax and the likes of Paul Henry, Paul Holmes, Guyon Espiner etc described as a “morass of left wing pinkos”.

              Seriously mate???

              • Big bruv …
                28 September 2011 at 8:19 pm

                Ok Viper

                For every Paul Henry there is a John Campbell.
                For every Leighton Smith there is a Willie Jackson.
                For every Michael Laws there is a Katherine Ryan.

                Paul Holmes is centrist at best, the mark of Espiner is that I have no real idea what his politics are.

                It seems Viper that you want to silence all those who do not agree with your politics, mind you, that is normal for the Labour party.

      • Big bruv 3.1.2
        28 September 2011 at 12:48 pm

        For once Viper is right.

        I told you guys about this over a year ago, the major problem with Labour and Labour supporters is your stupid and blind adherence to the party line.

        The Chris Carter case and the Philip Field case are two classic examples, as long as the Labour party leader said that Carter and Field had no case to answer you all blindly obeyed the orders of Goff and dear leader. However, as soon as they were gone you let loose your real feelings about these two reprehensible troughers.

        It is time that Labour and its supporters admitted that the people of NZ did not get it wrong in 08, it is time that Labour and it supporters woke up to the fact that the electorate totally rejected Clark and everything she stood for.

        Until you clean out all the useless deadwood (Goff, King, Mallard, Beaumont, Moroney, Horomia, Fenton and co) you will remain in opposition for a very long time.
        Labour also needs to distance itself from the Clark regime, what you need is an almost total re branding, you need to get back to being the party of the working man (the party I should support) the party for and of those who graft each and every day.

        At the moment all Labour stand for is being the party for the bludgers and parasites, the party for union hacks and the gaggles of gays, surely we have come far enough now that ones sexuality should not be an issue, do you really need a “rainbow” faction in the party?, are the Labour gay element so unsure of their own relevance and so insecure that they need special representation?

        Labour needs to reconnect with the working classes, putting up arrogant tossers like Cunliffe, Parker or Jones is not going to connect with a bloke who works 60 hours a week to feed his family.
        These people can smell insecurity at a distance of 100 miles (incidentally, that is the reason they are overwhelmingly supporting John Key, note I said Key not National)
        Cunliffe, Parker, Jones and any other of the potential leaders post the 2011 election will suffer the same fate as Goff because they simply cannot come across as anything other than arrogant academics.

        I am not sure who said it first (it may well have been Trotter) but I agree with the comment that Labour’s next PM is not yet in the house (with the possible exception of Kelvin Davis)

        Of course the other thing that Labour has stuffed up badly on is the continuous and tedious personal attacks on the PM, again, I told you over a year ago that these would not work, you are not up against a politician you are up against a phenomenon, attacking the guy because he has done well or attacking him for the way he went about making his money is not resonating with the electorate, they love the guy, hell I am no fan of his politics but only the most small minded moron cannot help but like the guy.

        But no, in your usual arrogant way you kept on with the failed tactics of the last Clark government, you kept reminding the electorate that you are small minded and vicious people who use their power to silence anybody who dares speak out against the Labour party or its views.

        The way Labour should have gone about beating Key (or at least crawling back to an honourable defeat) was to ignore him, you should have attacked those around the guy, you should have attacked the pillars of support that hold his government up, FFS it is a target rich environment yet you morons kept bashing away at the one solid thing that the Nat’s have going for them.

        Still, it is no skin off my nose, the current Labour party is never going to get my vote, the Nat’s might be no better than Labour lite but I will take them any day of the week over a rehashed Helen Clark government and all the nastiness and petty vindictiveness that implies.

        • Brett 3.1.2.1
          28 September 2011 at 4:31 pm

          Great post.

        • Vicky32 3.1.2.2
          28 September 2011 at 7:02 pm

          you are not up against a politician you are up against a phenomenon, attacking the guy because he has done well or attacking him for the way he went about making his money is not resonating with the electorate

          You really ought to try talking to the average person, and you’ll see how popular Key actually is! My son for instance, has changed his view quite considerably in the past year, and now sees Key for the triumph of form over substance that he is. My son represents the views of his colleagues and flatmates, all 20-something professionals..

          • AAMC 3.1.2.2.1
            28 September 2011 at 7:14 pm

            Yep, I reckon the youth vote will be an interesting one.

            See student protests yesterday, listen to student radio.

            Last election, there was no politics on BFM, they had all only ever known Labour govt, since they were about 8 or 9. Key comes in talking the same slogans as Obama, why not give him a go.

            Now student radio is rife with politics, and not supportive of the right, the babysitters I employ are desperate to get to vote. I don’t know any of them are endorsing Goff, but they want rid of Key. And they’re not part of the polls.

          • Big bruv 3.1.2.2.2
            28 September 2011 at 7:44 pm

            Vicky

            I am the ‘average person’, my friends are all working class people, each and every one of them refuses to vote for Labour, each and every one of them like John Key.

            However, let’s leave that aside, your post highlights my point precisely, you seem hell bent on attacking Key when that is the wrong way to go about beating the Nat’s.

            I repeat, you are dealing with a politician like no other in our living memory, the closest would be Lange yet even Key outstrips Lange for no other reason than he has a spine.

            Labour will remain irrelevant as long as you continue to ignore the message you were sent by the electorate, they rejected Labour and everything it stands for yet you guys keep insisting that the electorate got it wrong.

            Novembers election will only see that reinforced.

            • Puddleglum 3.1.2.2.2.1
              28 September 2011 at 8:41 pm

              “you are dealing with a politician like no other in our living memory”

              Hi BB, just what characteristics or behaviour of Key’s are you thinking of that distinguishes him in this way? A serious question. 

              • Big bruv …
                28 September 2011 at 8:58 pm

                Puddleglum

                “Hi BB, just what characteristics or behaviour of Key’s are you thinking of that distinguishes him in this way? ”

                I suspect your question is not genuine but I will answer it in that spirit anyway.

                I think the answer is fairly simple, the public know that Key is a self made man, they know he comes from humble beginnings and they know that he is (despite the best attempts at some morons here to paint him as such) not a man who eats babies.
                Key comes across as genuine, he does not take himself seriously as his predecessor did, he can have a laugh and poke fun at himself, even my Mrs who hates politics with a passion has said to me that she ‘likes that guy”.

                However, the main reason that Key is so popular is that the public know he is not a career politician, they know that he does not need the job, they know that he is in it for the very best reasons (not that I agree with him on that much) and they know that he actually cares.

                All of the PM’s who went before him came across as desperate when times got tough, Clark became nasty and vicious, Shipley I cannot comment on as I was out of the country during her brief tenure, Bolger was an idiot and the public could see that, Lange held on for the benefits (a lifetime with his nose in the trough is normal for the left) and Muldoon was just as nasty as Clark.

                The reason Key is so popular is because the public know that he is just like them, yes he has made a fortune but he remains a real bloke and one that they hold up as aspirational.

                To beat him you need to change tact, I suspect Key could be PM for as long as he wants such is his popularity and attacking him as the left keeps doing is only going to strengthen his support.

                • logie97 …
                  28 September 2011 at 9:26 pm

                  One thing you omit about his qualities there BB. You don’t seem to acknowledge that he is a liar…

                  • Big bruv …
                    28 September 2011 at 9:34 pm

                    Sigh….

                    Another example of Labour arrogance, another example of a small minded lefty who still thinks that the people of NZ got it wrong.

                    They did not get it wrong, they will prove this to you come November.

                • Puddleglum …
                  28 September 2011 at 9:42 pm

                  Thanks for the response, BB. It was a genuine question.

                  In return, I should explain how I’ve come to my understanding of Key.

                  I don’t have a TV and I tend to think quite seriously about political things, because I think I’m obligated to do that out of respect for my fellow citizens.

                  Since I read a lot and listen a lot – but watch very little – that means that I gain my sense of Key from the things I hear him say on radio or read that he has said in a newspaper. I then think about what he says and compare it to what I know (e.g., facts of the matter, past news reports, and the like).

                  I have to say that I’ve noticed inconsistencies, contradictions and what I perceive as an evasive lack of clarity to a degree that suggests to me that he is not genuine. (To that extent, much like any other politician.)

                  In fact, without trying to psychoanalyse him, I’d say he has learnt = probably from an early age – to adopt the persona of ‘ordinariness’ as a way of allowing him to achieve his goals. Interestingly, the same personal history you cite (‘self made man’) strikes me as having required Key to put his ambitions ahead of caring for others.

                  For example, I had a friend who was a currency trader (a rare one as she was one of the few women in the job at the time – early to mid 90s). She was a catholic and felt quite morally torn – she quickly came to realise that, in order to succeed, the expectation was that she had to deceive her clients (by first building up their trust in her) and, also, to compete ‘no holds barred’ with her colleagues. In her words, it was a profession in which “nice guys definitely finish last”.

                  That overall impression means that I don’t find him trustworthy.

                  When you say that “the public know” he is “just like them” that he is “in it for the very best reasons” and “that he actually cares” I’d probably replace the word ‘know’ with ‘perceive’.

                  My perceptions come, I admit, from means of judging someone else that perhaps most other people don’t use. That might explain why I have a different impression of Key than do many other New Zealanders. Obviously, I’m not convinced that I’m wrong (otherwise I’d change my mind).

                  BTW, in contrast to your wife, mine can’t stand Key and is quite virulently suspicious of him. In my experience, I have found her to be a very good judge of character – as opposed to appearance – and the main thing she values is honesty. She has almost always been correct in her suspicions about people whom others have called ‘nice’, ‘friendly’, ‘kind’, etc.. It’s quite remarkable.

            • ak 3.1.2.2.2.2
              28 September 2011 at 9:07 pm

              Big bub: they rejected Labour and everything it stands for

              Yeah possibly, blub, either that or wee Joky flip-flopped and accepted everything that Labour stands for and then squeaked to “victory” on the back these very same Labour policies, a media-led mass-hate campaign, a $50/wk election bribe and the blatant rorting of the electoral system in Epsom; and then proceeded to earn – even from his among own circle – the sobriquet of “Grinny Do-nothing from Hawaii”.

              So actually, they accepted everything that Labour stands for, and got an entertaining sideshow of cringe into the bargain.

              Either way, many thanks for your reasoned analysis and deep concern for the Labour party. I’m sure it will receive all the consideration it deserves.

              • Big bruv …
                28 September 2011 at 9:10 pm

                ak

                By all means ak, ignore what I have to say, keep your head in the ground and keep polling at low levels.
                Keep putting Mallard, Dyson, Fenton, and co at the top of your list, the Nat’s will govern for decades.

        • logie97 3.1.2.3
          28 September 2011 at 9:19 pm

          … nastiness and petty vindictiveness … take a look in the mirror.

          Oh and sleeping shareholders – includes the likes of Myers and others who inherited great wealth and reinvested – no sweat or risk at all mate.

          • Big bruv 3.1.2.3.1
            28 September 2011 at 9:36 pm

            Lol…so you would outlaw intergenerational wealth as well?

            • logie97 3.1.2.3.1.1
              28 September 2011 at 9:42 pm

              Not at all – but just pointing out to you that they are usually asleep while they are making shit loads more money – you know, on the backs of shift workers and the likes. Myers was at the head of the debate that wanted to cut the night watching firemens’ duties as well.

  4. Brett Dale 4
    28 September 2011 at 10:12 am

    The gap is to big to make up.

  5. McFlock 5
    28 September 2011 at 1:41 pm

    The total labour/greens vote is consecutively up in the last 3 fairfax surveys, according to the little script thingee, about 1% a month. NACT have dropped from 60% by about the same amount.

    This will become more volatile when the campaign fully kicks off, and assuming that their is no systematic underrepresentation in the survey (lol yeah, right) that means the 12% swing lab/greens need is actually only 6% from Nat to Lab. Then it’s 50:50.

         
    Assuming Act get in without poaching too much Nat support. Also Assuming that NZ1 can go either way and they’ll get in.

      

  6. randal 6
    28 September 2011 at 5:33 pm

    Of course the gap is closing. YOu can fool some of the people some of the time and Keys has just about played out his string as they say in the cowbiy comix. Even Nero was popular till he burnt Rome.

Links to post