Latest Roy Morgan poll

Written By: - Date published: 8:17 pm, October 13th, 2010 - 103 comments
Categories: Politics, polls - Tags: , ,

Nat 49.5%, Lab 36.5%, Gre 8%, NZF 2.5%, MAO 2.5% ACT 0.5%

Highest Labour vote since Helen Clark was PM. Lowest ACT vote in many many years. Key’s still holding the Nats up high.

103 comments on “Latest Roy Morgan poll ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Hilary 1
    13 October 2010 at 8:26 pm

    I was polled for this one.

  2. Policy Parrot 2
    13 October 2010 at 8:26 pm

    Translates as seats in the House as:

    National: 61
    Act: 1

    Labour: 45
    Greens: 10
    Maori Party: 5

    A 1 seat majority (once Speaker is appointed). NACT should be very worried. N.B. I have not included Dunne as he is unlikely to be reelected imho.

    • Colonial Viper 2.1
      13 October 2010 at 8:31 pm

      Labour need just 3-4% more, and for the Greens to grow another 1-2% without canabalising Labour support.

      NAT’s deathgrip on power may very well be fallible in 2011. IF the national level Left get their shit together like the local Lefties have done.

    • Marty G 2.2
      13 October 2010 at 8:46 pm

      speakers votes count now.

      • Marty G 2.2.1
        13 October 2010 at 8:48 pm

        and when I say ‘now’ I mean since the introduction of MMP. It’s a common misconception that the speaker doesn’t vote, they don’t in other westminster systems.

        but remember that the number of seats a party has is determined by the share of the party vote, so there’s a good argument that a party shouldn’t lose a vote just because one of its members is speaker.

        • Draco T Bastard 2.2.1.1
          13 October 2010 at 8:51 pm

          IMO, the speaker shouldn’t actually be an MP.

          • Lanthanide 2.2.1.1.1
            13 October 2010 at 9:30 pm

            I agree. That way we could get someone more impartial and hopefully talented in the role. However I believe that there isn’t actually anything stopping the appointment of a non-MP speaker?

            • ianmac 2.2.1.1.1.1
              14 October 2010 at 9:56 am

              Lockwood is doing a good job. If he retires as an MP next year, perhaps he could stay on as Mr Speaker.

            • Andrew Geddis 2.2.1.1.1.2
              14 October 2010 at 11:01 am

              “However I believe that there isn’t actually anything stopping the appointment of a non-MP speaker?”

              Well – there is the small matter of the Constitution Act 1986, s.12 … “The House of Representatives shall, at its first meeting after any general election of its members, and immediately on its first meeting after any vacancy occurs in the office of Speaker, choose one of its members as its Speaker, and every such choice shall be effective on being confirmed by the Governor-General.”

              But I guess that could always be repealed, along with several hundred years of constitutional practice …

        • Policy Parrot 2.2.1.2
          14 October 2010 at 1:52 am

          Stand corrected.

    • Pascal's bookie 2.3
      13 October 2010 at 9:06 pm

      Generous of you to give ACT Epsom there Parrot. 😉

      • lprent 2.3.1
        13 October 2010 at 9:10 pm

        I thought he was being generous as well. I get the impression that you could put a national penguin up against Rodney in Epsom at present, and the penguin would win. If the national candidate was too bad, then they’d vote labour. The super shitty fiasco just pissed too many people off across the entire political spectrum.

        • Draco T Bastard 2.3.1.1
          14 October 2010 at 1:37 am

          ATM, I’m not sure if the penguin would win. He’d get more votes than Rodney but National can’t escape the fact that they did pass the legislation for the SuperCity and even the people in Epson don’t like how that was done.

          • lprent 2.3.1.1.1
            14 October 2010 at 7:21 am

            The parrot is correct. They would only vote in a labour mp if they were forced to. The overall occupational distribution there is unique in my experience and almost screams capitalist. There are some significiant areas in the electorate that are different however, and those are what the labour candidates work for party vote.

            For labour to win there you’d have to assume that they had a choice between Rodney and ummmm say mellissa lee or whale. This was how Rodney got in in the first place. He convinced the Epsom conservative voters that a vote for act would help their national cause, and that he’d be a better MP than worthless ( not hard ). Problem is that he hasn’t convinced them that the super-shitty was a good idea and they have become increasingly jaded on his antics for years.

            It is only faced with two unpalatable choices that you would get a low conservative turnout for electorate vote ( the party vote will remain the same ) or protest voting everyone from labour to bill and Ben.

            • Herodotus 2.3.1.1.1.1
              14 October 2010 at 7:54 am

              Did Nat almost lose Remerua from memory Doug Graham to Lab about 3/4 elections ago, less than 1000 vaotes seperated the 2 candidates I think there was a Tizzard involved for Lab?

      • Policy Parrot 2.3.2
        14 October 2010 at 1:56 am

        Epsom is a blue-ribbon seat which generally know which side their bread is buttered, even if they can’t believe it’s butter. Labour has only came close to winning it during the ACT era (1987).

      • Policy Parrot 2.3.3
        14 October 2010 at 8:36 am

        Interesting point – but it would make little difference in this result – Nats would pick up his seat if any other candidate within Parliament (excepting the Maori Party) won it.

        Captcha has a typo: “inchs”

        • Mac1 2.3.3.1
          14 October 2010 at 5:53 pm

          ‘inchs’- plural of ‘inch’, anglicized Scots gaelic for small island, aye. Like the North Inch, off the coast of the South Island.

    • djp 2.4
      13 October 2010 at 9:24 pm

      Why have the maoris suddenly switched sides?

    • ghostwhowalksnz 2.5
      14 October 2010 at 7:45 am

      The appointment of Speaker doesnt effect the votes for a party in the House under MMP.

      • Interesting 2.5.1
        14 October 2010 at 11:21 am

        So does the speaker still cast a vote for their party?

        • Ari 2.5.1.1
          14 October 2010 at 12:52 pm

          I’m unsure on this, but I think the speaker’s vote is only lost on matters of conscience?

          And no, the PARTY casts the speaker’s vote for the party, based on how our rules work.

    • Interesting 2.6
      14 October 2010 at 10:18 am

      Parrot, assuming that Maori are going to go with Lab? interesting.

      Why not translate seats as:

      National: 61
      Act: 1
      Maori: 5

      Labour: 45
      Greens: 10

      • Policy Parrot 2.6.1
        14 October 2010 at 12:43 pm

        In the situation above, you are probably correct. The Maori Party will always want to maximise its influence. However, if it does hold the balance of power, it risks repeating the 1999 NZ First experience if it installs a National-led government. That is the reason why I grouped Maori Party with the left, to prove how close a balance of power situation actually is.

        The Maori Party’s influence lies in the electorate votes in receives, not the party vote. And a majority (not plurality) of Maori roll voters in both elections since the advent of the Maori Party have backed Labour with the party vote. Many voters see it as getting two for the price of one, Labour to look after them, and the Maori Party to keep Labour honest.

        So thereforth, if an electorate vote for the Maori Party is not seen as a proxy vote for Labour in the event of a hung parliament, those who split their vote will simply revert to voting for Labour electorate candidates and the Maori Party will be finished.

        In fact, there is some thought that merely not be in opposition to National will cost the Maori Party a seat or two, even though they have portrayed some successes as coming out of the agreement with National.

    • Shazzadude 2.7
      14 October 2010 at 5:54 pm

      I think Dunne’s chances are better than Hide’s. I don’t think the voters will want to risk a three-way split awarding Chauvel the seat again.

  3. Herodotus 3
    13 October 2010 at 8:52 pm

    The last election was handing the victor a hospital pass, wait until next year.
    Aussie banks shifting whatever capital they have in the Kiwi as quick as they can back over the ditch. It is almost becomming impossible to keep any funding line open, NZ will be exiting the capitalist world very soon (Balance of payments will look really good !!!! 🙁 ). It is hard to be a capitalist when there is no capital.
    Reduced govt tax take so how will the election promises be kept?
    The might Jafa city debt (incl CCOs hidden debt) mountain ever increasing with a rates base struggling to fund current levels let alone those promises that are to be kept.
    By chance we will be entering a Managed economy, without the skills to manage. Those in the public sector and many entertained from this site would not have the slightest idea of how the private sector is struggling.
    So to next years PM you will find out how Karl Donitz felt late in ’45.

    • burt 3.1
      13 October 2010 at 9:17 pm

      National have plenty of experience in being handed basket case economies from Labour. When they took office they had a decade of deficits predicted…

      • KJT 3.1.1
        13 October 2010 at 9:27 pm

        I was going to reply, but I then decided I would not dignify this rubbish with further response.

        • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.1
          14 October 2010 at 1:49 am

          That’s about the best you can do with burt – anything else just gets you stressed from trying to deal with the stupid.

      • Macro 3.1.2
        13 October 2010 at 9:30 pm

        Still rewriting history I see burt….
        You really do live in a world of your own making – it must be very pleasant for you.

        • felix 3.1.2.1
          14 October 2010 at 12:06 am

          That’s the weird bit – he doesn’t actually seem to enjoy it at all.

          Does anyone else read burt in the voice of A.A. Milne’s Eeyore?

          • freedom 3.1.2.1.1
            14 October 2010 at 9:50 am

            people often confuse Eeyore’s outlook as one borne of stupidity. Eyeore was quietly happy in his funks, and would regularly find joy in the simplest of melancholy days..
            Whereas Burt is a grumbling dissatisfied pedant with no ability to see beyond his own pocketbook. More suited to a stay at ToadHall than a holiday in Hundred Acre Wood

          • ianmac 3.1.2.1.2
            14 October 2010 at 11:41 am

            Eyeore was happy the day that he was given a broken balloon and an empty honey pot, and when he was given a new house. Now what would make Burt happy?

      • Colonial Viper 3.1.3
        13 October 2010 at 9:31 pm

        Can’t have deficits if you don’t have a government which borrows to create its money supply, burt.

      • burt 3.1.4
        13 October 2010 at 9:41 pm

        OK, are the three of you saying there wasn’t a decade of deficits predicted when National took office in 2008 – YES/NO ?

        • Colonial Viper 3.1.4.1
          13 October 2010 at 9:43 pm

          Nothing wrong with judicious deficits. Bill and John agree since they are funding rich peoples’ tax cuts with them.

          Of course deficits would no longer exist if the Govt used its sovereign right to control and issue all the money in the land.

    • Armchair Critic 3.2
      13 October 2010 at 10:23 pm

      This is probably how the government sees it:
      The CCOs that own significant assets must be put into debt if they are not already. They will see to it through legislation, if necessary. Then the debt can be used as a reason to sell the CCOs.
      Watercare have already been put into debt – they owe $345 million in taxes, according to their annual report.
      Now the CEO that oversaw this at Watercare controls the transport CCO too.
      I’m hoping Len Brown and a new government next year will put a stop to this.

  4. burt 4
    13 October 2010 at 9:45 pm

    Nats blame Labour for ‘decade of deficits’

    “After nine years of a Labour government we are now presented with a decade of deficits and quite frankly New Zealand can not afford Michael Cullen’s high spending low growth programme.”

    He said Miss Clark and Dr Cullen had to take responsibility for squandering nine years of economic growth.

    He’s a laugh isn’t he – saying Labour should take responsibility… what was he thinking.

    • Colonial Viper 4.1
      13 October 2010 at 9:48 pm

      Labour will certainly take responsibility for leading NZ as all John is doing is flashing his smile and waving, while Bill acts as the MP for Karori.

    • Zaphod Beeblebrox 4.2
      13 October 2010 at 10:05 pm

      Third lowest government debt in the Western World! Won’t be for long though that English and Key have conspired to trash the revenue base though.

      • Herodotus 4.2.1
        13 October 2010 at 10:30 pm

        Well spoken from the 2 headed man. Yet allowed NZ to have one of the largest OECD balance of payments deficits 8% (never addressed by either govt) and overseas debt. the govt debt levels allowed us some ability for greater govt intervention in giving us a buffer for the now past recessions. But should another occur in the near future we are out of bullets, unless we follow the thinking of NZFP in todays open mike comment 1.1
        http://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-13102010/#comment-258717
        http://www.oecd.org/document/31/0,3343,en_2649_34569_42539359_1_1_1_1,00.html
        http://www.oecd.org/document/30/0,3343,en_2649_33733_42547230_1_1_1_1,00.html

      • burt 4.2.2
        13 October 2010 at 10:33 pm

        But we have shit all to show for Labour’s 9 year tyranny than they paid down debt. Where is the shiny new infrastructure?

        NZ agreed in 1999 that they didn’t mind paying a few cents more tax to fix health and education. Bugger forgot about than and paid of the credit card – over to National now … ohhh look how bad National are the economy is in ruins and it has billions to borrow to fix health, education, new trains, roads, stadiums….

        Yeah yeah tick the red team.

        • Puddleglum 4.2.2.1
          14 October 2010 at 10:58 pm

          “where is the shiny new infrastructure”?

          Burt, it’s called ‘people’ and they are our most important asset. Paid parental leave; 4 weeks annual leave; early childhood education support; increases to the minimum wage; working for families; interest free student loans …

          I’m no blind supporter of Labour but I’ll back any policies that give human beings a breather and half a chance to have a life.

          National’s policies, by contrast, almost always undermine our human infrastructure making a harder world in which children and families find they have to survive: endless policies to make work, employers and the workplace dominate, over-rule and undermine individuals, families and communities (e.g., the raft of new labour legislation; tighter rules for beneficiaries; massive reductions in community education funding; new research funding criteria to prioritise the needs of industry, etc., etc.).

          Why do you support National when so often their policies lead to the destruction of persons, family and community? Don’t you like people, families and communities?

    • BLiP 4.3
      13 October 2010 at 10:37 pm

      Hey burt, seen this .

      Bill English had to swallow the proverbial dead rat this morning and effectively acknowledge that Michael Cullen had done something right in his stewardship of the Government’s finances in the past nine years.

      Now tell me, was Blinglish lying then or is he lying now?

    • rosy 4.4
      14 October 2010 at 8:02 am

      It’s a bit tautological to use as evidence for poor economic management to say that when national came into power national said there would be a decade of debt.

  5. Dan 5
    13 October 2010 at 9:46 pm

    I have spoken to a wide range of people after the local body elections, and many commented on what a great weekend it was. They all felt good about themselves, that there were more people in the country who had the same outlook on where things should be going; and that the message to central government was that they had better listen to the community rather than arrogantly foisting failed right wing agendas on a wide variety of cities and towns.
    When the people who voted for a change last time get the confidence to say they were wrong, then I have optimism there will be a change next election. Labour will need to enunciate clear points of difference, and will need to continue the hard work at local level.

  6. infused 6
    13 October 2010 at 10:28 pm

    Suddenly you care about polls? Oh I see…

    And it’s not the National vote that Labour has gained by… Doens’t really say a lot does it?

    • Lanthanide 6.1
      13 October 2010 at 11:09 pm

      Given Act is the one that lost the most ground, are you suggesting that Labour won voters over from Act?

      Or is it more likely that Act voters went to National and National voters have gone to Labour? Of course the flows from the former aren’t much more than a trickle, and the flows from the latter can only grow…

  7. Francisco Hernandez 7
    13 October 2010 at 11:20 pm

    Good.

    New Zealand voters are finally waking up to the fact that John Key started the recession

  8. luva 8
    14 October 2010 at 12:10 am

    So Labour is more or less where they were on the day Clark was booted from office. National still well ahead of where they were when Key swept to power.

    • Colonial Viper 8.1
      14 October 2010 at 12:18 am

      Apparently you can’t read graphs straight.

      Don’t worry mate, we’re working hard for every bit of momentum on the ground.

      Key is already a liability to National’s right wing and to its centrists.

      • luva 8.1.1
        14 October 2010 at 12:42 am

        Which graph did I not read “more or less” correctly.

        How is Key a liabilty to the right?

        The left hate him as they always have. But his support is still extraordinarliy high. Can you point me towards the National supporters that consider him a liabilty.?

        • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1
          14 October 2010 at 1:05 am

          How is Key a liabilty to the right?

          Uh, because he’s not Right, he’s very centrist.

          But his support is still extraordinarliy high.

          You are referring to measurements of history my friend, and hoping that people don’t pick up that his ‘leadership’ = ‘gutless judging of which way the wind is blowing today’.

          History will show that National’s popularity started irretrievably sliding from Sept 2009.

          • Lats 8.1.1.1.1
            14 October 2010 at 8:46 am

            I really hope you’re right CV. But we ought not underestimate the stupidity/gullibility of those who chose to vote for the Nats in 2008. If they did it once they can do it again, although Jonkey won’t have the carrot of tax cuts to wave in front of them next year I suppose. You have to wonder what bribe he’s going to pull out of his hat this time…

  9. smhead 9
    14 October 2010 at 8:57 am

    It’s so funny to see you lefties get excited about ONE POLL that still shows Labour miles behind, on the basis of a tiny improvement in Labour, while you ignore every other poll.

    I don’t see what you’re crowing about over this poll though. Labour’s support has risen at the expense of Winston. Without Winston you can’t form a government.

    • Craig Glen Eden 9.1
      14 October 2010 at 9:39 am

      I didn’t notice any crowing smhead just a few observations in relation to this poll and the weekends Local Government results. So any noises you are hearing in your head are yours alone.

      Built any space ships in your lounge lately sm?

    • gobsmacked 9.2
      14 October 2010 at 10:01 am

      smhead

      It’s not about one poll, it’s the long-term trend. After the 2008 election, National went to historic highs. They have slowly come down from those (very high) numbers, over many months. In 2010, only the Canterbury earthquake has given National a boost in polling. Otherwise the trend is one way.

      So the parties are almost back to election day, 2008. Obviously National would win, on those numbers. But the campaign hasn’t started yet. And if they lose only a couple of percentage points, then they need ACT or the Maori Party. Then it gets messy.

      All to play for, then.

      There’s a graph at the top of this page. The trend is clear.

    • the pink postman 9.3
      14 October 2010 at 3:53 pm

      It isn’t the Morgan poll that has excited it’s the fact the whole country voted known Left-Wing candidates at the local elections. I cannot remember a local body in the last 50 years where it was obvious which political party the candidates favoured . For years local body candidates have claimed to be”Independent” .Most of these Independents were Tories in drag. This year the Left has organized itself and won. If the party applies the same energy at the General Election Labour will win. The South Auckland votes are critical and can and will be the winning formula.
      The efforts of the Auckland team in this local election are to be applauded
      lets hope they are available general election time.However Key and his mates will not take this Left victory lighty. They wil be scheming right now!.

  10. Sanctuary 10
    14 October 2010 at 9:50 am

    Middle class & beltway opinion – read the Dimpost for a perfect example – is still totally dismissive of Labour. Mind you, middle class opinion also held that John Banks and Kerry Prendergast would win their respective mayoral races. Against a background of total middle class scorn and media hostility (let’s face it – the middle class IS the media in this country, and both groups are still totally besotted with John Key – their man, their aspirational model) Labour and the Greens are but 5% from drawing level with National. Further, the MP is about to implode and ACT is finished – I don’t think people outside Auckland realise just how discredited Hide is.

    My advice to the middle class? Start taking notice of the likely nature of Lab/Green government, because National is vulnerable as hell.

    • freedom 10.1
      14 October 2010 at 9:57 am

      do not overlook the potential real impact of Independants at the next General Election.

      I for one am not voting for any party untill they repeal CERRA and take it off the books.
      I will not support any party that knowingly puts dictatorial power above NZ laws,

    • Carol 10.2
      14 October 2010 at 11:34 am

      Many of us middleclass people are lefties. You are over-generalising. And some of us read the MSM, knowing it mostly leans to the right.

      • Sanctuary 10.2.1
        14 October 2010 at 12:29 pm

        Trotsky would disagree. And whatever you think of Marxist solutions, usually the analysis is pretty spot on.

        • Carol 10.2.1.1
          14 October 2010 at 4:14 pm

          Now you have confused me. I suppose it depends on what you mean by “middle” class. Trotsky’s ideas weren’t exactly the same on class as Marx’s – at least as far as the solutions go. Marx mainly focused on two classes, so for him there wasn’t really a middleclass. And I do like Marxist analysis, so do many people who are classed as “middleclass” by many non-Marxists.

  11. Adrian 11
    14 October 2010 at 9:51 am

    What about the possibility that Labour has risen by the undecideds getting down off the fence. Nationals 50% or so is 50% of people who don’t hang up, say pissoff or are genuinely undecided, their support is probably more like 38/40% of the population if that, and thats all they’ve got. Give the undecideds something to vote for and they will come out again. You listening, Phil.

  12. ianmac 12
    14 October 2010 at 10:12 am

    Morgan: “Of all electors surveyed, 8.5% (up 3%) did not name a party.”
    I take it that these are the undecided electors? If more are less sure of NAct is this a good thing?

    • freedom 12.1
      14 October 2010 at 10:25 am

      I would hazard a guess that the ‘undecided’ voters of today are more likely to be supporting Independants than simply not being able to choose which banker’s flag they want to salute.

      • Colonial Viper 12.1.1
        14 October 2010 at 11:17 am

        not being able to choose which banker’s flag they want to salute.

        I laughed out loud. Then I cried.

    • felix 12.2
      14 October 2010 at 10:35 am

      Some of those undecideds are the undecideds who later decide and ultimately decide the result of the election.

      Last time a lot of them voted Nat. Now they’re not so sure.

  13. Interesting 13
    14 October 2010 at 10:14 am

    Interesting that there have been THREE polls out in the last two weeks. and the only one mentioned is this one.

    why no comment on the other ones that show Labour down. Nats up?

    Rogue polls? or inconvenient truth?

    to keep balance all polls should be looked at and not just cast aside as not right just because they are showing results that dont suit.

    • gobsmacked 13.1
      14 October 2010 at 10:28 am

      @Interesting (not very)

      There has been precisely one poll showing National up and Labour down. It was the first one after the earthquake (Colmar Brunton, One News). Entirely predictable (and predicted).

      If you know of any others, please let us know.

      Let’s discuss any polls you like, such as people voting.

      • gobsmacked 13.1.1
        14 October 2010 at 10:36 am

        False.

        • gobsmacked 13.1.1.1
          14 October 2010 at 11:50 am

          This is quite amusing, but I should probably explain.

          I wrote “False” earlier, replying to a comment that has since been deleted.

          So now “False” is fixed at the bottom of the comments.

          So whatever anyone says, they get “False” in reply. Sorry about that!

          Ths is True.

      • Interesting 13.1.2
        14 October 2010 at 11:06 am

        http://www.3news.co.nz/Voters-weigh-in-on-GST-increase—poll/tabid/370/articleID/180826/Default.aspx

        While this shows a slight rise for Lab and a slight fall for Nats, it is in line with the Colmar Brunton Poll.

        Two polls with similar results.

        Nats:

        Colmar: 54% 3News: 53.8%

        Lab:

        Colmar: 32% 3News: 32.6%

        Greens:

        Colmar: 8% 3News: 7.6%

        Maori:

        Colmar: 2.4% 3News: 2.3%

        Act:

        Colmar: 1.1% 3News: 0.9%

        nz first:

        colmar: 2.4% 3news: 1.2%

        These polls were about two (2) weeks apart. so it is fair to say that they are a good gauge. two seperate polls, done two weeks apart with almost identical results.

        • gobsmacked 13.1.2.1
          14 October 2010 at 11:13 am

          So you were wrong, which is why you deleted your previous post.

          Apology accepted.

        • the pink postman 13.1.2.2
          14 October 2010 at 4:05 pm

          My personal opinion is that polls are a lot of godswallop. ie.who is asked , what is the question and more importantly what district ?
          Admittedly polls are sometimes right but they are also very often wrong . It’s the poll on the day that matters . If the Left gets out its people then the Left wins. As the late but great Joe HIll said “Organize Organize , Organize . The Auckland Lefties did just that ! Get the people out .

  14. Interesting 14
    14 October 2010 at 11:18 am

    My point gobsmacked is that it seems that only polls that suit are mentioned on this site.

    I would rather all polls were mentioned and discussed. that way there is balance.

    not just polls that suit egos.

    • Pascal's bookie 14.1
      14 October 2010 at 11:28 am

      That’s not very interesting at all actually.

      I’d rather you also said things that are interesting, that way it would balance out all the boredom.

      Saying fewer things that actually false would be good too, rather than just making up shit to suit your boring argument.

    • lprent 14.2
      14 October 2010 at 12:51 pm

      We don’t have room to post all of the polls and they are kind of irrelevant unless there is a change in trend as has shown up in Morgans for the last few times. In any case most of the polls from different polling companies have strong differences due to differences in polling techniques, which is why we tend to only put up Morgan polls because they are believed by the authors here to be closest to reality, as well as being far more regular than the others. Obsessive poll watching is a bit of a pointless activity. Looking at medium term trends in them is interesting.

      If you want to see all of the polls, go to a site that is a specialist in them. For instance I tend to look at KiwiBlogGuy for longer term trends.

  15. I dreamed a dream 15
    14 October 2010 at 11:39 am

    Forget about some of the peculiarities about MMP (such as minimum %, etc) for the moment, let’s look at pure numbers:

    Currently, the groupings are as follows:
    NACT Government: Nat 49.5% + MAO 2.5% + ACT 0.5% = 52.5%
    Opposition: Lab 36.5% + Gre 8% + NZF 2.5% = 47.5%

    If we move the Maori Party to their natural grouping with Labour and others, the totals are as follows:
    Centre-Right: Nat 49.5% + ACT 0.5% = 50.0%
    Centre-Left: Lab 36.5% + Gre 8% + NZF 2.5% + MAO 2.5% = 50.0%

    It’s a dead-heat, a year out from Election 2011. National must be worried. Considering the swing to the left in the recent local body elections (apart from the Earthquate Bob anomaly), National must be really worried. Let’s see if National will start getting panicky with how they run things. Interesting times ahead indeed.

    I lost interest for a while, but now I am excited again.

    • Seti 15.1
      14 October 2010 at 12:17 pm

      “Centre-Left: Lab 36.5% + Gre 8% + NZF 2.5% + MAO 2.5% = 50.0%”

      Still requires Winston being elected

      • Colonial Viper 15.1.1
        14 October 2010 at 12:20 pm

        Labour needs to go up another 2%, so do Greens.

      • I dreamed a dream 15.1.2
        14 October 2010 at 12:34 pm

        “Still requires Winston being elected”

        Come election time, I think Winston/NZF will gain enough votes off National to easily get above 5%.

        “Labour needs to go up another 2%”

        That should not be a problem even based on the current trend’s slow creep.

    • ak 15.2
      14 October 2010 at 2:58 pm

      ….. but now I am excited again. Aye. Now project from the difference between the Local Bod polls and the actual LB results and get orgasmic. Feel that tory fear – and wait for a big Benny-bash for Christmas.

      ( Earthquate Bob heh – prefer Seismic Prick meself…..Richter sphincter?)

  17. Shazzadude 17
    14 October 2010 at 5:51 pm

    If we say that the Maori Party will win all of the Maori electorates, on those numbers Labour/Greens/Maori Party/Peter Dunne would have the numbers for government.

    I\’m starting to think looking at those numbers that it won\’t be Labour who will need New Zealand First, it will be National. Given it looks like they can\’t rely on ACT, National have two options to secure governance, aim for the 50% plus majority, or rule Winston back in.

  18. Jeremy Harris 18
    14 October 2010 at 11:51 pm

    If this isn’t a one off it’s quite close…

    National is trying to be all things to all people and when you do that you piss everyone off…

  19. swordfish 19
    15 October 2010 at 4:02 pm

    Far, far more important than all this, why can’t opinion poll companies make the demographic breakdowns from their polls widely available ? I’d like to be able to compare support changes between 2008 and now in terms of age, socio-economic group, gender, geographical location and so on.

    And I’ll take it very badly if anyone replies “false” !!!

Links to post