Labour voters, if you could vote to keep the Greens in parliament would you?

Written By: - Date published: 9:13 am, September 10th, 2020 - 116 comments
Categories: election 2020, greens, labour - Tags: ,

Thought the Standardistas might want to have a crack at this. Vote on twitter if you have an account, and/or comment below. Play nice.

Labour voters, if you lived in Auckland Central which candidate would you vote for and why?

  • Chloe Swarbrick, in case the Greens fall below 5%
  • Helen White, don’t want the Greens in parliament
  • Helen White, don’t care one way or the other about the Greens

btw party vote undecideds/wavering, this is for you,

116 comments on “Labour voters, if you could vote to keep the Greens in parliament would you? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Tony Veitch (not etc.) 1
    10 September 2020 at 9:19 am

    Not only would, but will.

    Unfortunately, not in Auckland Central, but the Greens were always going to get my party vote.

  2. xanthe 2
    10 September 2020 at 9:29 am

    No Way!

  3. Bearded Git 3
    10 September 2020 at 9:29 am

    After Labour's massively timid tax policy release yesterday the Green's are the only progressive option.

    Labour

    39% on over $180k

    Greens

    37% on over $100k 42% on over $150k and $7.9 billion Wealth Tax to reduce poverty

    • Sabine 3.1
      10 September 2020 at 10:20 am

      and thanks to good loopholes and excellent accounts non of these taxes will ever be paid as they are currently not being paid. \

      there are many reasons to vote for the green, but these taxes are not.

      • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1
        10 September 2020 at 11:37 am

        Greens Tax Policy:

        We’ll close tax loopholes & minimise tax avoidance by taxing big digital giants such as Facebook and Amazon.

        Closing the loopholes that allow such massive tax fraud by the rich is the big one but not one that’s making headlines.

        • Sabine 3.1.1.1
          10 September 2020 at 11:56 am

          currently of no use to anyone tho.

          and that should have been Labours first thing to do, after increasing base benefits by 200 per week to all that are on a benefit.

          • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.1.1
            10 September 2020 at 12:36 pm

            You complained about the lack of work on tax loopholes. I pointed out that the Greens had policy on that as well.

            Labour has the same, vague policy of loophole closing. This probably has something to do with having to find the loopholes first.

            As I’ve said before. They really just need to design the tax system from the ground up and then throw out the old system.

    • jimekus 3.2
      13 September 2020 at 2:03 pm

      I was going to vote for National for the Tamaki seat, just to confuse them about support levels, and Labour for the party vote, but after Labour's timid tax policy I will send another message and change to Greens for both. This way hopefully should prevent Labour from having a majority government and allow Greens in coalition to uphold their tax priority. I also see National voters switching to Labour to defeat my logic. Does anyone else see this?

  4. Ad 4
    10 September 2020 at 9:34 am

    No.

    Stop whining and do better.

  5. Gosman 5
    10 September 2020 at 9:38 am

    How would this be any different to National voters voting for David Seymour in Epsom and would this generate the same sort of revulsion from members of the left?

    • weka 5.1
      10 September 2020 at 9:43 am

      the revulsion over Epsom people voting DS is because of ACT policies.

      • Ed1 5.1.1
        10 September 2020 at 10:29 am

        At least some of the revulsion is because of ACT policies, but some is because the manipulation of the electoral vote should not enable coat-tailing (although the 5% threshold should also be lower). I hope the new government reviews the election laws again.

    • Tiger Mountain 5.2
      10 September 2020 at 9:51 am

      Incels and gun lovers deserve political representation too–which ACT leader David Seymour seems personally pleased to provide–but that does not mean the rest of us have to approve of the weasel!

    • Draco T Bastard 5.3
      10 September 2020 at 11:40 am

      It wasn't National voters voting for ACT that was repulsive.

      It was National telling National voters in Epsom to electorate vote ACT.

    • Marcus Morris 5.4
      10 September 2020 at 9:22 pm

      This would be an initiative taken by Labour supporters in Auckland Central. There is no indication of overt "instruction" as there has been by the National Party in Epsom. Let us not forget the infamous "tea and scones" stitch up between Banks and Key. To all intents and purposes Labour and the Greens are parties of principle although are times when I wish they would resort to such "tactics of convenience" – some might say "strategies".

  6. Visubversa 6
    10 September 2020 at 9:38 am

    Auckland Central voter – 2 ticks for Labour as usual. The Greens will get 5% this time, as they did last time. No need for Labour votes to throw them a lifeline, they don't need it and don't deserve it anyway. I dislike their lack of political discipline and their over abundance of political opportunism.

  7. Tiger Mountain 7
    10 September 2020 at 9:49 am

    Party Voting Green. Would vote Chlöe if lived in Central.

  8. Heather Grimwood 8
    10 September 2020 at 9:58 am

    I think the qualifier for Helen White, is too slanted. i.e. requiring a ‘not wanting Greens in Parliament’ attitude.
    This question to give clear result should be split, one as above, and one just ‘Helen White because………. ‘

    I do write as member of Labour Environmental sector and Dunedin North branch but am also pedantic about clarity when setting questions.
    May a Labour and Green Government result via this election.

    • weka 8.1
      10 September 2020 at 10:33 am

      the questions were deliberately chosen because they're about Labour voter attitudes to the Greens being in parliament. If I wanted to know who Labour voters would vote for generally if in Ak Central, I would have asked questions about that, but that's not what I wanted to know.

  9. Andre 9
    10 September 2020 at 9:59 am

    I'm really struggling with this one.

    There seems to be very little overlap between the interests and priorities of the people at the top of the current Greens list, and enthusiasm for the kinds of changes needed to move towards a science and evidence driven world that needs to accommodate 8 billion people (and still climbing fast), all wanting a better lifestyle, while also moving to a better environment for all.

    To me it looks very much like the people with the ability to thoughtfully balance a bunch of different views and drives have left, and we're back to the noughties where social activism, token gestures, and frankly, outright woo-woo, are at the top of the priority list.

    So personally, I'm kinda indifferent. I don't think a term out of parliament is necessarily the death of the Greens. It may cause some soul-searching and re-alignment, and they may come back stronger in 2023 with a better balanced suite of people and priorities. If Labour has sole responsibility for actions and outcomes for a term, they may also step up their game, rather than just leaving that stuff to the junior sorta-partner to be the sacrificial goat.

    • weka 9.1
      10 September 2020 at 10:03 am

      thanks for the honesty Andre.

      The risk is that in 2023 the Greens don't get back in and Labour loses the election because we're an MMP environment (despite the polling this year) and it can't sustain a majority govt.

    • weka 9.2
      10 September 2020 at 10:07 am

      I'm not seeing any woo from the GP MPs. I'm not sure about the conservation/social justice split in values amongst more conservative Labour voters. Much of what has happened with the GP is about the rise of JA, the fallout from Turei's speech (many NZers vote on perceptions of competency), and a term of Labour having adopted more green policies (thanks to JA and the Greens).

      The GP caucus has changed, but I'm not convinced the issue is about being less environmental than being more social justice, which is a clear climate action imperative but obviously not attractive to lefties who are more socially conservative or who aren't committed to solving poverty.

      • Heather Grimwood 9.2.1
        10 September 2020 at 10:31 am

        Weka, there has always been solid ‘green’ thinking permeating Labour. I belonged to Labour/Green group operating before rise of Green Party…probably in ’70’s…have put newsletters in Hocken to prove.
        It’s wonderful to see the real needs of the planet become major political issues through whatever avenue….hopefully all possible avenues i.e. consensus.

        • Draco T Bastard 9.2.1.1
          10 September 2020 at 11:47 am

          there has always been solid ‘green’ thinking permeating Labour.

          And yet they continually fail to do enough.

    • RedLogix 9.3
      10 September 2020 at 11:08 am

      Good answer, I think you nailed it there Andre.

      I gave the Greens my party vote in 4 of the past 5 elections, mainly because I really want representation for the interests of the environment in Parliament. And I think for the most part their social agenda is well-intentioned if prone to driving off into the political ditch.

      for the kinds of changes needed to move towards a science and evidence driven world that needs to accommodate 8 billion people (and still climbing fast), all wanting a better lifestyle, while also moving to a better environment for all.

      Actually in most developed nations endogenous population growth rates are declining, and all the projections show that we will peak out at less than 11b or so, but that's a minor quibble. The crucial point is that the so-called 'golden billion' in the developed world are going to be joined by at least another 10b people in this century. As someone put it a while back, we ain't going to get there by all growing organic kale and selling it at the local farmers market.

      Getting there is going to demand not only a 10-fold increase in energy supply, but in order to develop sustainable closed loop resource systems, maybe as much as 100-fold our current levels. This combined with continued developments on a whole range of technical, materials and process methods in a bewildering array of fields.

      It seems to me the Green Party of NZ thinking is woefully lagging in this respect.

      • Draco T Bastard 9.3.1
        10 September 2020 at 12:15 pm

        It seems to me the Green Party of NZ thinking is woefully lagging in this respect.

        I tend to agree with you there and I'm a member of the Green Party.

        Unfortunately, the other parties are actually worse as they keep pushing the unsustainable growth necessary for capitalism.

  10. Sabine 10
    10 September 2020 at 10:21 am

    no – indifferent to Chloe Swarbrook

    no – cause i never even heard of the other person

    • weka 10.1
      10 September 2020 at 10:34 am

      the question isn't if you are indifferent to CS, but the Greens. And the question is about whether one wants the Greens in parliament or not.

      • Sabine 10.1.1
        10 September 2020 at 10:44 am

        If anything i agree with Andre above.

        As for your candidates i answered in regards to that.

        Indifferent to the one name i know, very indifferent to the name i don't know, absolutly indifferent to the current Party- regarding the non fight by the Green Party here in Rotorua.

        Its a bit like the Dems in the States, you either run a competend candidate everywhere in order to raise the profile of the party and maybe give people the idea of change and even the believe that you are in it for good, or you only run approved candidates in the two three electorates that you may win and people will just stop paying attention as clearly certain parts of the country are not good enough for the Party to consider.

        There are currently two sings for the Green Party in Rotorua, both next to the Labour sign. Heck Vision, Advance, Maori Party, New Conservatives have put more love behind their candidates then the Green Party.

        Support your local areas everywhere, put local candidates up every where – serious ones to boot, not just Auckland Central, and then maybe the well being of the Party would not just hinge on one or two people.

        • weka 10.1.1.1
          10 September 2020 at 10:46 am

          "As for your candidates i answered in regards to that."

          You missed the purpose of the post/question.

        • Draco T Bastard 10.1.1.2
          10 September 2020 at 12:25 pm

          Support your local areas everywhere, put local candidates up every where

          The Green Party doesn't have enough resources, yet, to run a candidate in every electorate. 70 electorates at, IIRC, $35000 each is a lot of money.

          I suspect that the other parties that you mention are doing the same but they think that Rotorua is winnable for them.

          • Sabine 10.1.1.2.1
            10 September 2020 at 12:31 pm

            I doubt, to be honest, Tamaki might have a chance. Not sure about the others.

            But Rotorua is a decent sized semi – rural town and there is nothing.

            Btw, when i lived in West Auckland i met the candidate for Labour, the no mates party, NZfirst. You know whom i did not meet? The greens.

            That is my main beef with the current party, they are nigh on invisible but for a handful of people on top.

            And that handful of people is well 'less then inspiring' to fair weather Green voters like myself that usually place a vote depending on the situation.

            Last election i voted the Greens for Ms. Turei, this election i will wear a full body suit, bring a barge pole and will either vote for labour or the greens (or legalize Aotearoa – non of the non binding referdum waste of money shit) if Labour is safe and hope for nothing. And considering the times and the election promises coming from both camps and the last three years, nothing is seemingly best we can get.

            • Draco T Bastard 10.1.1.2.1.1
              10 September 2020 at 12:53 pm

              Btw, when i lived in West Auckland i met the candidate for Labour, the no mates party, NZfirst. You know whom i did not meet? The greens.

              And, in all my life, I've only had one candidate turn up on my doorstep (Labour when I was in the Epsom electorate). The reason is obvious when you think about it – it's physically impossible for any candidate to get around to every single house in an electorate.

              Electorates are, IIRC, between 30,000 and 40,000 people so there's about 10,000 homes in each electorate. Each candidate in each electorate will, maybe, get around to several hundred. That's several thousand that were missed. Even with volunteers there's going to be some houses that missed getting flyers.

              Again, you're demanding the impossible and, as a side note, this is another reason why I think we should be getting rid of electorates and taking our democracy online.

              • Sabine …
                10 September 2020 at 1:17 pm

                not doorstep, business.

                The candidate came to the businesses, to ask if we would have posters/flyers etc in the shop.

                NZfirst left a poster for a open meeting at the RSA.

                Labour – Twyford held his corner meetings at the block of shops.

                Ngaro came to speak to 'my' husband….lol, but the lady for the no mates party in council dropped in several times to leave collateral behind for voters.

                Greens? nope. nothing. and that is why the Greens have a hard time getting over 5%. At some stage they actually need to do something to increase their voter block.

                So no i don't demand the impossible, and if it is impossible for the greens to be publicly available to potential voters then maybe they do deserve to not get elected.

                And yeah, take your democracy online, and then you have no computer/phone, you have no money for data, you have no home to begin with, no electricity to charge your devices, libraries are closed cause covid…sure thing…..why not. What could go wrong.

                But we can not ask of the Green to put a bit more effort behind their want to be in parliament.

                And maybe a little less "we are so holy' attitude would also be going a long long way.

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  10 September 2020 at 2:03 pm
                  • Not everybody has a business.
                  • Not every business is in the town square.
                  • Not everybody goes to the town square.
                  • Maybe you weren't there on the day that they were

                  I can assure you, as someone who's volunteered for the Greens, that they put a great deal of effort into being elected.

  11. francesca 11
    10 September 2020 at 10:40 am

    I've heard Chloe speak a few times at local meetings here and I'm seriously impressed Was first put off by what seemed to be a "head girl..debating team "type persona, but that is the polar opposite of who she actually is

    No other party ticks my boxes ,policy wise ,like the Greens do , so I will party vote Green.

    Shaw's fast apology and reversal over the green school thing reassures me that he is responsive to Green membership, and overall Green policy

    Not a hope in hell of Steve Richards winning over a very popular Damien O'Connor..a true west coaster from old family, so I'll vote Damien

    Labour shouldn't be too cocky about an outright win ,and I would have thought the Greens would make better partners than NZ1st

    A vote for the Greens is a vote for a Labour led govt

  12. Tricledrown 12
    10 September 2020 at 10:48 am

    Gosman the more extreme policies that support/minor parties put forward the less support the right or left block will attract.

    MMP.

    Glossy ACT are only getting a temporary spike next year after the election National will eventually find a leader who won't scare the voters to Labour and ACT.

    Then ACT will return to its voter base of 0.5%.

    Reply button not working sorry.

  13. Bearded Git 13
    10 September 2020 at 11:11 am

    Reply button not working….agree with Francesca above….and more people need to realise that (as weka says) even if Labour doesn't need the greens this time, in 2023 they may be desperate for a support party and the greens will find it much harder to get back into parliament if they get voted out this time.

  14. Obtrectator 14
    10 September 2020 at 11:11 am

    Party vote Green: (a) to do what I can to get them back into Parliament, and (b) they're my true political "home" anyway.

    Local candidate (nowhere near Auckland): Labour. Might just have a show of taking the seat; the Greens definitely not.

  15. KJT 15
    10 September 2020 at 11:25 am

    Party vote Green.

    And electorate for Labour to keep Reti and NZF, Out.

    And get the rather good Labour candidate in. Who appears to have more of a social conscience than current Labour MP's.

  16. Te Aro Resident 16
    10 September 2020 at 11:54 am

    I'm in Wellington Central, and last election was two ticks Labour. May have to revise that if Greens under 5% next month. If I was in Auckland Central, however, I would definitely vote for Chloe (but party vote Labour).

  17. Geoff Lye 17
    10 September 2020 at 11:59 am

    Voted Yes to Chloe.
    We desperately need the Greens remodel of acc to reform our Healthcare welfare funding. Also to fold pharmac into acc if I as a green party member can convince them of why it is needed.

  18. Riff.s 18
    10 September 2020 at 12:00 pm

    If I was in Auckland central I would vote chloe and party vote labour. Nothing to lose and potentialy a plan b in 2023. Although I think Shaw in wgtn central is a better option. The left majority is overwhelming there.

    • greywarshark 18.1
      10 September 2020 at 2:03 pm

      I think that Riff.s is how I'd go.
      Chloe is good, but seems as if she can't win going on lprent summary so Labour for party vote.

      I definitely would like to see Greens have an electorate and if Wellington Central and Shaw fit, then Labour could well step back. He has stamina and brains, and sees the whole picture. He seems to have drawn some ire as Peter Jackson has, but he saw the whole picture too and has given anothr string to our bow in NZ enterprise.

  19. Stuart Munro 19
    10 September 2020 at 12:39 pm

    I'm in two minds at present – really not happy with Green performance in relation to what I see as the task, and very annoyed with Labour.

    Not with the timidity of the tax increase, but the arrogance of taking further changes off the table – that was unnecessary, and therefore an impropriety.

  20. lprent 20
    10 September 2020 at 1:00 pm

    I live right next to Auckland central and have been in that electorate for most of my time in Auckland after uni – ie about 30 years. That was why I mostly worked in my 'home' electorate of Mt Albert (I grew up there) and never bothered with Auckland Central much even when I was in the electorate.

    The factional politics in Auckland central has always been completely stupid. Inside Labour, the Alliance and the Greens. One of the main reasons that National was able to grab the electorate vote was because Auckland Central ‘natives’ got sick of it long ago. The other reason is the strong demographic shifts to an older, more affluent and more conservative bent.

    I'd vote for Helen White simply because I don't think that there is a shit show in hell that Chloe Swarbick could carry the electoral vote. Which would make my fantasy electorate vote for a Auckland Central Green candidate a complete waste of time. Just look at the electorate vote numbers in this electorate over the last couple of decades. It has increasingly leaned right.

    This simply isn't the electorate it was when the Alliance carried it in the 1990s. The Greens don't have the kind of electorate organisation that is required to carry and to continue carrying an electorate.

    Sure, the popular Nikki Kay was carrying soft National vote. That is likely to flee from the new National candidate. However that is likely to go to Helen White – it is really unlikely to go to Chloe Swarbick.

    But I can't see that enough Helen White vote going to a new Green candidate. At best I think that Chloe Swarbick will come in third, and the real question is if a Labour or National candidate got the largest vote.

    So far I haven't seen ANY green information that detracts from my analysis. In fact I suspect that the only real information would come from looking at the results after the election and a couple more – if Chloe Swarbick is capable of taking a long enough view to entrench herself into the electorate.

    She has to figure out how to appeal to older demographics who actually turn up at the polling booth. So far I can't see her trying to do that.

    What I see is a pile of dimwits discussing might-be fantasy politics rather than anything I can recognise as being actually achievable at a real electorate level.

    The new Green candidate in Auckland Central is unlikely to be anything apart from a spoiler giving a electorate back to National.

    BTW: on the other hand, if I thought that the Greens weren't likely to party vote get the threshold – then I'd happily give them a party vote.

    • greywarshark 20.1
      10 September 2020 at 1:55 pm

      Reading Lprent's reasoned, knowledgable thoughts about his electorate is good. Could this be the first in an ongoing and building electorate discussion as to strength of parties and trends in the electorate. We could cover the whole of NZ. But though, whether putting such info out there and into the hands of the grubs behind the scenes of the conservatives who hold the money and the media, might cancel this idea out as worthy. Everything must be done with thoughts of unintended consequences.

  21. McFlock 21
    10 September 2020 at 1:24 pm

    I think it's important to keep the Greens in parliament. I think that Labour's practicality moderates Green reflexiveness (e.g. the green school), but the Greens push Labour to find the limits of that practicality (Labour tend to lack imagination).

    So party vote if they're close to threshold, definitely.

    Electorate vote for a Green candidate with a chance of winning and coattailing other Green MPs in? Maybe. Depends if they're a dick.

    But Labour having a cup of tea and throwing that campaign? Nope. That takes the choice away from the voters. The Green candidate might be a dick, if not now then when the practise becomes routine.

    • greywarshark 21.1
      10 September 2020 at 1:42 pm

      Good thinking McFlock. But still a trace of 20th century thinking. We are short of time, the practise may never get a chance to become routine, and lefties winning at each stage that we can NOW, is essential. Just think of the difference that Corbyn could have made, not everything okay, but a definite pause and good changes achieved. But he was knifed in the back by Labour officials FGS.

      There are other infections out there besides Covid-19, and they affect the brain and clear thinking especially the part where morals and ideals arise in the synapses. Who knows when this type of brain rot will spread and result in a total transformation in another generation (20 years) of the human downwards that rivals the upward trend to the smart apes we are today. So smart that we cut ourselves, and that is literal not figurative. Seize the moment, or likely, cease the moment.

      • McFlock 21.1.1
        10 September 2020 at 2:17 pm

        Yeah, nah.

        The cup of tea is basically political corruption. Not good corruption, like people joing parties to compromise on policies in exchange for actual electoral leverage. It's the respective party HQs horse-trading to subvert an electoral outcome.

        • greywarshark 21.1.1.1
          10 September 2020 at 4:10 pm

          Actually they are choosing to set aside their MMP options and with one major contender withdrawing, letting the voters decide between the other two important contenders. It says to their supporters, it is important to give this Party a chance to get into Parliament in their own right, they can't force the voters to give their votes to that Party's candidate, but they indicate the person stands with their blessing. People who don't like the candidate or the decision, can then vote for the other major Party's candidate. There is always some horse trading when choosing candidates and the support they get.

          • McFlock 21.1.1.1.1
            10 September 2020 at 4:24 pm

            If they need another party's candidate to withdraw (or step back), they're not getting in in their own right.

            By cutting a deal the party HQs are denying the voters the opportunity to have the most popular candidate. What about the voters who don't support party B?

            If a party can't get into parliament in its own right, it desrves to go into time out for a few years.

            • greywarshark 21.1.1.1.1.1
              10 September 2020 at 4:34 pm

              Isn't that applying equality rather than equity. For a party like the Greens, they don't qualify for that sort of rigid response. They have something to say and do that a large number of mostly wealthy NZs aren't prepared to step up to until forced by fate. We are trying to have a hand in choosing our fate from dwindling alternatives. I say fuck that custom, show flexibility in this time of emergency and let's get going before it is too late.

              • McFlock …
                10 September 2020 at 5:06 pm

                That would be along the lines of the "it can't be us, the electorate must be stupid" excuses.

                "We" includes voters who don't want the Greens anywhere near parliament. For better or ill, they too are part of a democratic system.

                It has nothing to do with equity and equality, unless we also decide that the variety of minute fascist-adjacent parties running for election this year also deserve to be giften an electorate seat. I for one do not want my local MP to be a "New Conservative".

                • greywarshark …
                  10 September 2020 at 7:10 pm

                  Rigid response. We all have to put up with what we are offered and we all want something different. How do we get anything done that satisfies? Not well as a rule, though there are exceptions. But quoting the Political Bible with the zeal of an evangelical is unlikely to help us; can someone walk on water?

                  • McFlock …
                    10 September 2020 at 7:34 pm

                    The question isn't whether parties walk on water to get electoral support, but how deeply they swim in shit.

                    If the Greens drop below 5% this election, they will not be disbanded. I think they're more established than that.

                    There is also the possibility that three years out of parliament will make them a better and more electorally responsive party than three years as a supplicant. The Epsom sinecure has done ACT no favours in becoming more attractive to voters.

                    But my primary distaste for the idea remains the same: electorate MPs should not be horse-traded by party HQs. They should be elected by democratic means. In a democracy, voters select their representatives, not party functionaries in back rooms.

  22. Robert Guyton 22
    10 September 2020 at 1:34 pm

    Here's what a dyed-in-the-wool greenie plans to do; vote for the Labour candidate, Party vote Green. If I can do that to support Labour, you Labourites could just as well support The Greens. smiley

    • Cinny 22.1
      10 September 2020 at 1:43 pm

      I'm doing the same Robert 🙂

      And if I was in Auckland Central I'd definitely vote for Chloe, she has proven herself to be a massive asset in our Parliament.

    • mac1 22.2
      10 September 2020 at 3:41 pm

      That's what a d-i-t-w Greenie can afford to do, as of course you vote for the party of your choice.

      The electorate vote, however, and this for me is the strength of MMP, allows us to select the best local candidate to vote for.

      Is the best candidate a candidate who might win a place in a coalition with my first choice's party under the coat-tailing MMP provision?

      If the Green were a better candidate I'd certainly look at them, but I'd prefer to see the coat-tailing provision go, and drop the threshold to a lower level than 5%, say 3%. That should do away with the shenanigans of Epsomandering, tactical voting and second-guessing a fickle electorate.

  23. Mika 23
    10 September 2020 at 2:09 pm

    I considered giving my party vote for the greens when they looked close to going under the 5% threshold in 2017. I was door-knocking for Labour at the same time as mulling on this.

    But now I could not contemplate voting for their attempts to enshrine gender identity ideology in law (a woo-woo, anti-science, stereotype-fixated, faith & superstition based neoliberal belief system).

    I did have more time for Swarbrick earlier on, but watching her in parliament during the debate about the Statistics NZ proposal to discontinue census data collection on sex in favious of gender identity was quite an eye-opener. She sat behind Shaw pulling faces as Sarah Dowie and Tracey Martin asked Shaw questions on the potential impact on the proposed change. It was so immature and disrespectful. And sad, as I do think she’s smart enough to know better.

  24. Kay 24
    10 September 2020 at 2:12 pm

    In Rongotai, supposedly up there for Green Party vote, and extremely safe Labour. I do think that with Annette King's retirement that could've been a great opportunity for a Green electoral push here but we've got Paul Eagle instead. Name recognition from his council days probably helped there too.

    I'll party vote Green as always, but might for the first time pass on the electoral vote. Still considering it. I just can't bring myself to support Labour in any size, shape or form right now and Green's don't stand a chance. Would love the option to vote for CS.

  25. mary_a 25
    10 September 2020 at 2:35 pm

    Yes absolutely.

    Left Auckland three years ago for beautiful Cromwell. So I will electorate vote Labour, party vote Greens.

  26. Alan 26
    10 September 2020 at 4:52 pm

    James rattling the sabre now – to the delight of the 2% hard left but scaring the Range Rover mums right into the arms of Labour – top move Greens!

    • Robert Guyton 26.1
      10 September 2020 at 6:31 pm

      You're such a sincere Green supporter, Alan, never faltering, never losing the faith; I thank you most sincerely!

  27. ScottGN 27
    10 September 2020 at 5:17 pm

    So the Greens are dangling a threat to decamp to the crossbenches if Labour won’t come to the party on their wealth tax?

    Maybe the party leadership thinks that the party base need a bit of a rark up after the Green school debacle? But it’s hard to see how throwing a tanty with this will do anything other than strengthen Labour’s position with voters.

    • weka 27.1
      10 September 2020 at 5:29 pm

      "So the Greens are dangling a threat to decamp to the crossbenches if Labour won’t come to the party on their wealth tax?"

      Where did they say that? A link please.

    • solkta 27.2
      10 September 2020 at 5:50 pm

      Well Labour is going to have to do better than its pathetic tax policy so far that is for sure. Green members will not ratify a deal if there is nothing in it.

    • Andre 27.3
      10 September 2020 at 5:52 pm

      Threatening to go hardline on a policy that was already quite likely to be contributing to a chunk of their former supporters drifting away sure doesn't seem a smart strategy.

      • solkta 27.3.1
        10 September 2020 at 5:57 pm

        If you are talking about yourself, you weren't going to vote for them anyway.

        • Andre 27.3.1.1
          10 September 2020 at 6:08 pm

          I'm very confident I'm not alone in the wealth tax contributing to me likely becoming a former Greens supporter for this election. The question is merely how large the group is.

          • weka 27.3.1.1.1
            10 September 2020 at 6:22 pm

            GP wealth tax document said "The net wealth tax will be set at a level where only around 6% of wealthiest New Zealanders will pay the tax"

            Not sure if that's 6% of NZers, (who are wealthy), or 6% of thewealthy NZers. Probably the former, but still a small proportion and I would guess not a huge number of GP voters that would be put off (as compared to the wealthy GP voters who are happy to pay more tax).

            This assumes that there is clear communication about the policy and who it affects, which given NZ election campaigns and the MSM isn't a given.

            Otoh, the left wing voters who want Labour to do more are going to be pleased.

            • Andre 27.3.1.1.1.1
              10 September 2020 at 6:37 pm

              I kinda feel like none of the Green supporters here have actually paid any attention whatsoever to what I've said about why the wealth tax is a crap proposal, let alone taken it on board. It appears that all are completely stuck in the extremely simplistic mindset of "oh they're rich, it won't hurt them to take a bit off them" and nothing penetrates that bubble. It feels like I've been talking to stones about why a capital gains tax is by far the better solution.

              But I can assure you, I'm not the only person that's broadly supportive of Greens and would be affected by the wealth tax, and is fine with paying more tax in principle, but is nevertheless very aware of how different tax structures affect lives and decisions. And don't want a bit of the wealth tax, because of the damaging effects of when it is levied and the message sent by how it is structured.

              • weka …
                10 September 2020 at 7:20 pm

                Admittedly I didn't follow the nuance in how you would be personally affected, but I did get that an important part of the issue is psychological.

                My own position is that it's an imperfect policy that would improve in being worked through with a coalition partner. So it's more about the basic principle and the messaging for me, the details of who pays what when can be changed.

                I don't see a CGT as being an equivalent, probably because it was originally a Labour policy with a different intent. Was it going to raise similar amounts to the wealth tax?

                I remain unconvinced it's a primary key in the housing crisis solutions but am open to changing my mind on this.

                • Andre …
                  10 September 2020 at 7:51 pm

                  The keys to making real improvements in the housing problem lie much more in the government choosing to pull on some of the many levers they have available to simply get more homes built. Neither a wealth tax nor capital gains tax nor estate tax will do much to damp down the housing problems when all the other settings remain fucked up.

                  It's a fool's errand trying to use tax structures to solve housing problems. Taxes won't and can't do that.

                  What taxes are about is sharing the costs of building and maintaining the society we all benefit from, plus a certain amount of sending messages about what activities are and aren't helpful to society. So the tax argument is about how to share those costs among different people, and a certain amount of argument over whether trying to influence decisions is even a legitimate goal of taxation.

                  When it comes to amounts raised, that's mostly a matter of rates and thresholds. With the caveat that amounts raised in NZ will likely be very small immediately after introduction, rising as more and more people start realising the capital gains they've made over longer and longer periods. I can't be arsed checking up right now, but IIRC at times in the US, capital gains taxes have accounted for almost 20% of the federal tax take. That's quite a lot higher than what the Greens think they'll get from their proposal.

                • solkta …
                  10 September 2020 at 7:57 pm

                  probably because it was originally a Labour policy

                  I think you will find that CGT was Green policy for many years before Labour picked it up and fumbled it so badly.

              • RedBaronCV …
                10 September 2020 at 7:54 pm

                I too think the Greens wealth tax is to put it politely "naive" and I suspect designed by people who have littler experience of the workings of the tax system at upper levels. Is it part of party capture by a young Auckland base who also prioritise other activist issues? I've also noticed other Green MP's off topic -Golriz- was trying to extend 16000 of the work travel visa's that would normally go home. Now that is not even a local constituency and in a limited work environment probably not smart.

                Still in terms of direction of travel Greens on sustainability and attempting to improve the lot of the economic bottom is in a different class to the other parties.

                And to all the people wondering why the greens/labour do or don’t do things then another option is to join the party and have a say in policy and electoral organisation. These parties aren’t “other” they are us

          • solkta 27.3.1.1.2
            10 September 2020 at 6:27 pm

            but there is also the group who are looking at the Labour tax policy and thinking WTF. So much talk from Labour but no delivery.

            • Andre 27.3.1.1.2.1
              10 September 2020 at 6:45 pm

              There are indeed voters that feel that way. But there aren't any in my circles that I'm aware of for whom it will make a difference to their vote, the Greens aren't an option for them for other reasons. Shaw's made quite a gamble that going hard line will pull more in than it will tip over the edge and out.

    • Robert Guyton 27.4
      10 September 2020 at 6:27 pm

      "Co-leader James Shaw made the comments on Thursday, saying the only post-election deal that was off the table completely was one which would give National power. "

      The only post-election deal that was off the table…

      I see…

  28. ScottGN 28
    10 September 2020 at 5:39 pm

    I’m in the Mt Albert electorate so no prizes for guessing where my candidate vote will be going. My party vote will be going to Labour. A Labour majority government would be great but failing that (and it’s a huge ask) then I want Ardern to have the strongest minority possible. I hope the Greens get over the threshold.

  29. ScottGN 29
    10 September 2020 at 5:42 pm

    Shaw said as much in the news item on Radio NZ weka. No link yet but I’ll stick it up when it appears.

    I understand that the Greens have often have the raw end of the coalition’s negotiations over the term of the government but this sort of posturing is probable not a great idea at this time and from a party that could well not make it back into parliament.

  30. xanthe 30
    10 September 2020 at 6:10 pm

    whats our plan for 2020?… hey i know. lets target labour voters.

    isn't that what we always do?… yes! got a better idea ?

  31. ScottGN 31
    10 September 2020 at 6:24 pm

    That about sums it up xanthe.

  32. ScottGN 32
    10 September 2020 at 6:37 pm

    @solka 27.2

    Putting aside the merits or otherwise of the various policies on offer. My comment was more oriented to the wisdom of James Shaw making this statement at this time.

    Clearly his comments are intended for the party faithful with whom he has found himself seriously offside in the last few weeks. The rest of us, however, just see empty rhetoric.

    • solkta 32.1
      10 September 2020 at 7:27 pm

      No, if you look back at the dynamics of previous elections you will see that this is exactly the time when minor parties make these statements – what would be the point of voting for the Greens and their policy platform if they will not be negotiating hard for that platform after the election?

  33. ScottGN 33
    10 September 2020 at 6:42 pm

    @solka 30.1

    Of course all parties are competing for voters in the electoral marketplace. But it’s a pretty damning indictment on a party whose electoral appeal is so low or erratic that every three years they are reduced to begging for support from their potential coalition partner’s voter base just to survive.

    • Robert Guyton 33.1
      10 September 2020 at 6:54 pm

      Could you be any more down on The Greens, ScottGN? Perhaps if you really tried you could squeeze some more blood out of your little greenstone!

  34. Shaky 34
    10 September 2020 at 7:33 pm

    I want better labour laws for blue collar workers (specifically Fair Pay Agreements) and I'm also concerned about climate change.
    I usually vote Labour (honest) – I'm very proud that Jacinda is our Prime Minister.
    I live in Nelson and my priority is to rid the region of Nick Smith.

    This election, I will be giving my party vote to the Greens and voting for Rachel Boyack (Labour) as my local MP.
    I’m sure I’m not the only Labour voter who is ‘left’ of Labour – we must make sure that the Greens get over 5%

  35. ScottGN 35
    10 September 2020 at 7:33 pm

    @solka 32.1

    That’s rubbish frankly. If you look back at previous elections you’re most likely going to hear party leaders saying that they aren’t about to negotiate the C & S in the media before the voters have had their say. And that’s what James Shaw should have done today.

    • solkta 35.1
      10 September 2020 at 7:42 pm

      Unlike Winston First the Greens are always clear about what policies they will push for in negotiations.

      Asked if the Greens wealth tax plan was a "bottom line," Shaw said that it was a "top priority".

  36. ScottGN 36
    10 September 2020 at 7:48 pm

    @Robert Guyton 33.1

    You know whenever I do those Vote Compass type thingies I always come out aligned with the Greens. I WANT them to be in a coalition government with Labour.

    But governing the country is tough and the day-to-day politics are brutal – just look at Ardern and what she’s had to deal with. If the Greens want to be part of the next government, I’m all for it, but you guys will need to get real and put on the long pants.

    You’ve potentially destroyed yourselves over a measly grant to a school. You don’t approve of private schools, I get that, I don’t either. But the apparent lack of any political acumen from anyone in the party in dealing with the problem is extraordinary and doesn’t bode well for a so-called mature political party and their prospects in a coalition government. Frankly if the PM was smart she’d take one look at the funk the Greens are in and go, “bugger this, I’ll be better off trying for an improbable majority.”

  37. RedBaronCV 37
    10 September 2020 at 7:59 pm

    I do wonder if the Greens should go for a two tick campaign in Rongotai and Wellington Central though.

  38. ScottGN 38
    10 September 2020 at 8:01 pm

    @solka 35.1

    And then went on to say that the Greens might go to the cross benches if they don’t get what they want…fine, whatever, but don’t puff your chest out and try to wave a big stick when you haven’t got one. You just look silly.

    • solkta 38.1
      10 September 2020 at 8:13 pm

      That is just the reality. The membership won't ratify an agreement that is empty. Why would they?

  39. ScottGN 39
    10 September 2020 at 8:43 pm

    @solka 38.1

    Why would they indeed? Maybe we should just wait and see who’s left standing on Oct 18? But I’m getting the vibe that Labour won’t be too unhappy if the Māori Party claim back a seat or two.

  40. Corey Humm 40
    10 September 2020 at 9:13 pm

    The Greens don't seem to realize two things 1. We voted strategically last election and the greens wouldn't be here today if Labour voters didn't save them in 2017.

    2. The greens lost 4% TOP got atleast half of that 4%. There used to be so many straight male green voters now they are a dying breed.

    Almost every top voter I've ever met is a former green voter who wanted radical reforms and marijuana but felt alienated and attacked by the greens who seem to blame every ill in this world on "cis het normative, patriarchal facist male scum" and being against freedom of speech. Post election greens doubled down on this, there are a lot of damn good straight blokes in this country who would be voting the greens if the greens stopped telling them how privledged they are when they are probably struggling like hell, I will be party voting green but in the long term the greens need to win back straight men noones saying ditch social justice but honestly if I was straight id never vote Green. Six years ago every straight Young make Lefty I knew was pretty much a greeny. Fix it.

    • Dennis Frank 40.1
      11 September 2020 at 7:48 am

      Yeah, you got it. The problem with the Greens is unacknowledged bias. They were established to advance the common good. You no longer hear that from their spokespeople.

      I've always been keen on social justice too, but when politicos use that as the basis for pushing a sectarian view they always alienate those who aren't in their sect.

  41. infused 41
    10 September 2020 at 10:42 pm

    Having them gone would be the best outcome of this election. Even more so than NZF

  42. mosa 42
    11 September 2020 at 11:06 am

    The very real prospect of the Greens not making it back is a real concern which is why all of us that want a progressive influence on the left in a future Labour led government must party vote Green and if you are in Auckland central Chloe would be an outstanding representative for the electorate.

    Without the Greens we maybe looking at a Lab – Maori coalition after the election which will mean with Tamihere who in the past was always on the right of Labour will mean any prospect of a progressive influence will be absent.

    A majority for Labour may embolden some in the party to flex their muscles but they would face an uphill battle as like Key Adern has total control and will not want dissenting voices from the membership.

    If anyone is in doubt about a vote for the Greens they should take a little time to read their vision for the decades ahead.

    https://www.greens.org.nz/ourgreenvisionforaotearoa

    • weka 42.1
      11 September 2020 at 11:15 am

      snort, that would teach the left, a Labour/Mp coalition. The Māori Party's female co-leader looks interesting though, and some of their policy has been awesome.

      Which seat/s are the Mp likely to get? I haven't been following.

      • mosa 42.1.1
        11 September 2020 at 1:02 pm

        Hi Weka there appears to be renewed interest since Tamihere came on board and the way has been cleared for their participation in the minor party debate.

        It will take just one seat to fall to the Maori party and depending on their current party vote could have an additional two M.P s come in off the list.

        I think it is a possibility no one has really thought about if the Greens and NZF don't make it back.

        https://www.waateanews.com/waateanews/x_story_id/MjQ1NzU=/What-latest-Poll-means-for-the-Maori-Party?

        • weka 42.1.1.1
          11 September 2020 at 3:51 pm

          thanks mosa. I certainly haven't been thinking about it, or paying attention really, other than Davidson in Tāmaki Makarau.

          It's important even if the Greens and/or NZF get back in.

  43. Jane Smith 43
    12 September 2020 at 3:04 pm

    Not a chance I that I will vote Green this time.

    The Greens now define a woman as anyone who says they are a women. But they haven’t told their voters who are happily unaware of what this actually means.

    So any male rapist or violent abuser can just say he is a woman and get sent to womens prisons to rape and abuse again. They don’t need psychiatrists or doctors approval to do this. If they say they are a women, they are even if they have male genitals and are sexually attracted to women. That’s what the “ self definition” that the Greens are peddling means. No safe spaces for women. None.

    Likewise Paedophiles, sexual abusers, voyeurs, stalkers can now access their victims in womens and children’s changing rooms, womens refuges etc. A grown man can stick on a dress call himself a woman and display his penis to a child in a changing room get away with it. And they have done the changes sneakily behind the scenes, including changing the definitions of a woman on the census which James Shaw if leading.