Leaks and leaks

Written By: - Date published: 11:52 am, October 24th, 2011 - 69 comments
Categories: david parker, election 2011, john banks, Shane Jones - Tags: , , ,

As more oil leaks from the Rena, National’s beginning to leak too. I’ve just been hearing about their latest internal polling, and it ain’t pretty. As the earlier Horizon poll suggested, the Rena has been an inflection point for National and the masses of soft support they’ve accumulated is drifting away.

I’m told that the Nats own numbers show them down 5% since the Rena/double downgrade/S&P lies/throat-slitting clusterfuck hit them, which puts their support in the mid-40s.

The big beneficiary has, as predicted, been the Greens who are at 15%. Labour’s on 30%.

45% plays 45% with the minors making up the last 10%.

And, on the subject of the minors, we already knew the Nats’ internal polling shows John Banks is toast in Epsom, but it also shows Peter Dunne in big trouble in Ohariu. Just as Espomites don’t enjoy being national laughingstocks, people in Ohariu are sick of voting for the hair.

The revelation that John Key himself will be voting for Paul Goldsmith was a kick in the pants for any National voters considering ‘taking one for the team’ and voting for Banks or Dunne. (Btw, note to David Parker: be careful not to make Epsom a race between you and Banks or about a Labour-led government vs National-led one – that only favours Banks).

Polling also shows that, in Taranaki, Andrew Little and Jonathan Young are neck and neck, as are Pita Sharples and Shane Jones in Tamaki Makaurau.

So it’s very, very much game on.

And don’t expect this to be a blip that fades. It’s more like the Orewa speech, which successfully recast a whole lot of what Labour had done to that point in negative terms. Many soft National supporters saw the non-response to Rena and have re-examined how Key has handled Pike River, the Christchurch earthquakes, the double downgrades, and successive economic crises.

The good news is that the pumping of oil off Rena is going OK but the damage to National will leave a more permanent stain.

69 comments on “Leaks and leaks ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. BWS 1
    24 October 2011 at 11:59 am

    [five week ban for calling me a liar without evidence. Eddie]

  2. Maui 2
    24 October 2011 at 12:01 pm

    Let the games begin !

  3. Draco T Bastard 3
    24 October 2011 at 12:14 pm

    Many soft National supporters saw the non-response to Rena and have re-examined how Key has handled Pike River, the Christchurch earthquakes, the double downgrades, and successive economic crises.

    Yep. IMO, people weren’t happy with how NAct were running the country but were willing to give them another go and then Rena hit Astrolabe and the incompetency could no longer be denied. This has caused those “soft” voters to decide, even if they haven’t admitted it to themselves yet, that they won’t be voting NAct this year.

    • just saying 3.1
      24 October 2011 at 12:47 pm

      Three of my swing-nat whanau won’t vote national. A couple more undecided. And that’s after the All Blacks victory last night. I suspect if he tries to capitalise on the rugby any more than he already has done, it will backfire on him. Popularity is a fickle beast, and some of the folks are ‘checking his act out kinda close’ now.

      Bit of dilemma for national. It’s not like they have a team or policies to fall back on.

  4. Josh 4
    24 October 2011 at 12:40 pm

    It would be interesting to know where the minor parties sit in this poll.

  5. Lanthanide 5
    24 October 2011 at 12:42 pm

    I have my doubt that the Greens can pull 15% on the day, though.

    • Josh 5.1
      24 October 2011 at 12:44 pm

      Yeah, I reckon Labour will claw back a few percent from them, provided Goff performs well in the televised debates.

      • QoT 5.1.1
        24 October 2011 at 1:12 pm

        I’m not sure Lanth was referring to Labour “clawing back” any Green votes – my interpretation was that, as often happens, the Greens poll really well but the voters just don’t show up on the day (for any number of reasons, but in the first place consider how many young voters just don’t get enrolled in the first place).

        • logie97 5.1.1.1
          24 October 2011 at 1:19 pm

          QoT… would be interesting on what data you judge that. Gut feelings are that Green voters are committed voters and will certainly be enrolled (usually political animals). More likely though that some will migrate back to their former parties of choice. Or it could be that those who say they are going to vote Green do, but as the undecided and unpolled get into the booths they commit to the other parties and thus the Green vote appears to have fallen on percentage terms.

          • felix 5.1.1.1.1
            24 October 2011 at 1:22 pm

            “Gut feelings are that Green voters are committed voters and will certainly be enrolled (usually political animals).”

            Yes but “green voters” =/= “green poll-ees”.

          • QoT 5.1.1.1.2
            24 October 2011 at 1:24 pm

            No “data”, as such, just my own “gut feelings”. Last election the Greens polled really well, but on election day the numbers weren’t there and they certainly hadn’t gone to Labour. I offer the low enrolment rate among young people as one out of a number of possible factors. I know some people thought there was a generally lower-than-usual turnout on the Left last election due to maybe pessimism or lack of engagement.

            What I was mainly questioning was the notion that a drop in Green support on election day would be down to Labour making any gains in the liberal/green Left population.

            • possum 5.1.1.1.2.1
              24 October 2011 at 3:19 pm

              The Greens always get less votes then their polling that is agreed, however in 08 the drop was a lot more the in 02 and 05 and was directly the result of poor politics, where they were seen to only support a unpopular Labour party in their silly postioning statement. Had they had not made that poor statement they would have got 1 to1.5 % more IMHO
              They will not make the same mistake this time
              James Shaw the candidate who is number 15 on the list will get in Mark my words
              (only need about 13 or so%)

          • swordfish 5.1.1.1.3
            25 October 2011 at 3:05 am

            I’d say Queen Of Thorns and Felix are right.

            (1) Green voters are not the same as Green activists.

            (2) Both Green voters/sympathisers/supporters and non-voters are disproportionately under 35.

  6. dazed & confused 6
    24 October 2011 at 12:45 pm

    HORIZON – you’re not taking that sign-up-here-we-include-any -and- all -non-random pollsters seriously surely!

    • bbfloyd 6.1
      24 October 2011 at 1:21 pm

      hmmm… still dazed and confused i see…..you’ve yet to make any sense on this site… i’m curious as to what you are trying to achieve… is this your way of getting some creative writing experience? it’s better than some methods, but so far, you havn’t got it….

    • Draco T Bastard 6.2
      24 October 2011 at 1:34 pm

      Yes, you are dazed and confused. Sure, anyone can sign up to Horizons panel but they don’t automatically get included in the polls. The people in the polls are a random subset of the panel.

      I like the methodology but they need more people so as to get a better random selection.

      • higherstandard 6.2.1
        24 October 2011 at 1:37 pm

        I been included in their poll each time under three different aliases – still haven’t won the ipad though.

        All of my aliases are voting green by the way.

        • Draco T Bastard 6.2.1.1
          24 October 2011 at 1:57 pm

          Yes, well, there’s just some people who are psychopathic and who go around corrupting everything they touch because it brings them some sort of thrill. You, HS, are obviously one of these people.

        • Eddie 6.2.1.2
          24 October 2011 at 2:20 pm

          people can lie in phone interviews too.

          You contribute 0.15% to the Horizon polls.

          And, since you say that your aliases always vote Green, you can’t have had any impact on the 11% of people who voted National in 2008 now saying they will change their votes over Rena. Can you? Because your input is consistent, you can’t impact the important function of polls, which is to measure change.

          Did you also get into Farrar’s polls for National and lie in them?

          • Colonial Viper 6.2.1.2.1
            24 October 2011 at 4:56 pm

            Damn your statistical brain.

          • higherstandard 6.2.1.2.2
            24 October 2011 at 5:16 pm

            “Did you also get into Farrar’s polls for National and lie in them?”

            No – although I’d luv to corrupt them as well as polls aren’t worth the binary they’re written on, and serve only as a massive wankfest on sites like this and Kiwiblog.

      • dazed & confused 6.2.2
        24 October 2011 at 2:03 pm

        That might as well be, but their results look nothing like all the other polls, and that has to create more questions than it does answers surely.

        • felix 6.2.2.1
          24 October 2011 at 2:18 pm

          Not at all. The difference is the “don’t knows”.

          When the other polls get 30% “don’t knows” they ignore them and publish their results as if they had answers from 100%, when really their answers only total 70%

          Horizon drills into the “don’t knows” and tries to find their preferences.

          Not such a mystery really.

          • Lanthanide 6.2.2.1.1
            24 October 2011 at 2:31 pm

            Yeah, but is that 30% “don’t know” vote really worth including with the rest of the results? These people are more likely than most to not vote at all.

            • Eddie 6.2.2.1.1.1
              24 October 2011 at 2:36 pm

              think of horizon as more like a tracking poll than a standard phone poll.

              They’re asking the same people for their opinions every month. So, when a significant percentage of them change their opinions, that’s indicative of something, even if the headline party support numbers are off.

              Like I say, National’s internal polling, according to my sources (and you don’t have to rely on me or them, but I know they’re credible) confirm what Horizon says about the impact of Rena.

              • Lanthanide …
                24 October 2011 at 2:53 pm

                Are you sure Horizon ask the same people every month?

                Draco at 6.2 says they have a panel that they randomly select from.

                • Eddie …
                  24 October 2011 at 3:12 pm

                  As I understand, they have a pool of people and ask a selection of them to participate each month – but it’s a majority of their pool each month – so, they’re basically asking the same sample for their opinions each time.

                  http://www.horizonpoll.co.nz/page/121/comparing-po

                  • Draco T Bastard …
                    24 October 2011 at 4:40 pm

                    Yea, that’s why I said that they need more people on their panel. More people would have it so that the same people aren’t being asked all the time.

            • felix 6.2.2.1.1.2
              24 October 2011 at 3:27 pm

              “These people are more likely than most to not vote at all.”

              What are you basing that on?

              I know lots of people who when asked will instantly blurt out the name of a party but when pressed don’t even know there’s an election this year and aren’t enrolled.

              According to you, they’re more likely to vote than someone who tosses up between Nat/Lab and decides during the campaign.

          • insider 6.2.2.1.2
            2 November 2011 at 10:57 am

            And Horizon shows the Conservatives on over 4%. That’s got to ring some credibility alarms

    • Eddie 6.3
      24 October 2011 at 1:39 pm

      Horizon’s poll only confirmed common sense and what National’s internal polls say.

      On whether Horizon’s polls are accurate, there’s a number of technical questions here.

      Are people who voluntarily sign up more likely to lie about their intentions than people called on the phone?

      Horizon, like all polling companies, weights its results (by ethnicity, age, gender, vote in 2008 etc) to ensure that its sample is representative of the population – so, the real question isn’t whether they’re ‘random’ because any mis-sampling is weighted for – the question is whether people who sign up to an online polling org are more or less likely have changed their opinion than the general population over the Rena or since 2008?

  7. thejackal 7
    24 October 2011 at 1:37 pm

    Factor in the PM getting caught in an elevator and missing the end of the game in his rush to get some of the lime light and an epic handshake fail… and it’s a rather large clusterfuck indeed.

  8. Jenny 8
    24 October 2011 at 1:52 pm

    No doubt the ‘markets’ will go into a panic as a left leaning Labour led coalition government looks more and more likely after the election.

    After more than a decade of the Greens being locked out of Government, Labour will not be able to placate the powerful neo-liberal business lobby by stitching up a deal with the minor parties of the right, that omits the Greens.

    The hope is, that in partnership with the Greens, Labour will be able to return to it’s social democratic roots and start to tackle the pressing issues of inequality and environmental destruction.

    • Draco T Bastard 8.1
      24 October 2011 at 2:01 pm

      The hope is, that in partnership with the Greens, Labour will be able to return to it’s social democratic roots and start to tackle the pressing issues of inequality and environmental destruction.

      That’s the hope – whether they will or not is another question. They’re still making all the wrong noises about it. Noises about growth and export led recoveries rather than about determining what our Renewable Resource Base is and then making plans to live within it.

      • Lanthanide 8.1.1
        24 October 2011 at 2:34 pm

        As repeatedly said to AFKTT, those noises are what you have to say to get elected.

        There’s no point bleating about what you believe to the The Truth (whether you’re actually correct or not) if the public don’t want a bar of it.

  9. randal 9
    24 October 2011 at 2:20 pm

    even the national party faithful know that the john keys government is attacking everybody willy nilly.
    this is a very bad time and inflation must be running at least 10%.
    they want to have it both ways.

  10. gingercrush 10
    24 October 2011 at 3:13 pm

    LOL. You’re dreaming.

    • Eddie 10.1
      24 October 2011 at 3:45 pm

      you don’t believe that National’s internal polling shows the Rena has hurt them? That’s not what my sources say.

      Why don’t you give Farrar a ring and ask him.

  11. Adrian 11
    24 October 2011 at 4:20 pm

    Jenny, don’t be so sure about the “markets” panicing, DrMicheal Power, global head stategist for Investec ( $100 billion ) criticsed English, Key et al “.. hands up in the air, chips fall where they may ..( on the NZD ) ..is actually very, very short-term, benign neglect ” and ” ..a strong dollar hollows out your economy ” Ouch! Full story on Fairfax by Hamish Rutherford. This guy could have written Labour’s policy. Also, appropo polls etc, theres something happening out there, a commercial real estate agent has just offered me hoarding sites for Lab ( free ) on properties for sale . Curiouser and curiouser!

    • Jenny 11.1
      24 October 2011 at 6:24 pm

      a commercial real estate agent has just offered me hoarding sites for Lab ( free ) on properties for sale . Curiouser and curiouser!

      Adrian

      What’s curious about that?

      What would be curious would be a commercial real estate agent offering hoarding sites to the Greens for free.

      Talking about sharing hoarding sites:

      It is very noticeable out here in South Auckland that National Party supporters have obviously been asked to host a Maori Party hoarding as well.

      A decidedly non sectarian approach on the right to assist their struggling support partner.

      To bad that on the left, the Labour Party can’t get over their sectarianism and do the same for their support party.

      Though Adrian, I think you would find that your real estate mate would swiftly withdraw his invitation for free bill board sites if he had to host a Greens bill board as well as a Labour one.

      And as for the likes of Dr Micheal Power…. if they thought that Labour was really going to take on the kings of capital in favour of workers and their families all their donations to Labour would dry up.

      • Colonial Viper 11.1.1
        24 October 2011 at 6:35 pm

        What’s curious about that?

        Its very very curious actually…it means that this particular real estate agent does not believe that a Labour hoarding will damage the sales value of the property…and that it might even improve it.

        That’s a very good sign if thats his read of the market.

  12. The Baron 12
    24 October 2011 at 4:53 pm

    Eddie,
    That’s interesting, because the internal labour polling that I have had leaked to me suggests that Phil Goof remains about as popular as typhoid, and that the idea of a Labour/Green/Winston First/Mana combo scares the shit out of everyone.
    So, ah, I guess we will have to wait and see who’s totally real leak is accurate, eh?

    • Colonial Viper 12.1
      24 October 2011 at 5:00 pm

      interesting mate, since Labour is about its entire front bench team, and National is about its show and wave pony, John Key.

    • Dan1 12.2
      24 October 2011 at 7:34 pm

      Interviewing your typewriter again TB. The vibes I get from a variety of electorates are that the NACT party is running scared. Cabinet ministers out door knocking, or other cabinet ministers really getting offside with a cross section of the community by either sending in lesser mortals, or refusing to appear.
      Bring it on. The next 4 weeks will be fascinating.
      PS: I reckon the PM’s new Mason handshake will go viral. What a wally!

    • fmacskasy 12.3
      27 October 2011 at 8:23 am

      “and that the idea of a Labour/Green/Winston First/Mana combo scares the shit out of everyone.”

      As opposed to a National/ACT/Maori Party/Peter Dunne/Uncle Tom Cobbly combo?

      Chatting to a couple of Nat supporters in my electorate, I got a very harsh response to John Key. Nat voters were not happy with him.

      Whether that translates to a vote for another Party, or simnply stay-at-home, is anyones guess.

      But if the reactions I’ve heard is symptomatic then yes, National has good cause to be worried.

      • lprent 12.3.1
        27 October 2011 at 9:57 am

        Yeah. Been getting that a lot amongst my diverse family and friends. They were never for John Key. He just hadn’t irritated them. They are starting to become against him because he has now started to irritate them. Besides now the election is on and they’re starting to reflect who to vote for (and against).

        Looks pretty damn volatile out there.

  13. Eddie 13
    24 October 2011 at 4:57 pm

    well, the leaks I’ve got are real.

    You seem to suggesting that you made yours up. Strange.

  14. ak 14
    24 October 2011 at 5:42 pm

    The strength of the upcoming beneficiary-bash – already signalled as a NAT election plank – will indicate conclusively what the real polls are saying.

    The closer the polls, the harder the NACT jackboot will come down on the poorest.

    See they’ve lost the targets of Catholics, Jews, gays, women, maori, cripples – even commo-bashing is so passe, and no Hels or Winnie or health managers to demonise this time, so it’s back to the poor old mythical faithful bludgers who can’t bash back.

    If you’re right Eddie, expect a sudden ramping up of the softening-up process already begun by the propaganda wing. Read all about it in “independent opinion” pieces in coming weeks in any major media outlet.

  15. Mark 15
    25 October 2011 at 7:41 pm

    Nice try. Far too much wishful thinking I feel.

    Rumours I’ve heard is Chauvel is polling third in Ohariu in the internal polls – not surprising that the wealthiest electorate in the country isn’t turning Labour when no where else is. But good work at trying to discredit the only viable support partner for the Nats now.

    I see you banned someone for calling you a liar without evidence. How about you provide some evidence of your own (and don’t just quote random numbers; we deserve to know real details).

    [My sources are confidential and there’s no physical evidence. I’m not saying you have to believe me. Nor am I stopping you asserting your own information with the same degree of proof as I provided. Whether people will believe us comes down to their judgements on our credibility. Where BWS crossed the line was calling me a liar on my blog without evidence to prove I am. We don’t welcome people who are rude to their hosts without anything to back it up. Eddie]

    [lprent: That was all made clear in the post. I’d suggest that you read the policy, especially the criteria for self-martyrdom offenses. Unfortunately Eddie saw this comment before I did. Softhearted moderation takes all of the fun out of it. ]

    • Eddie 15.1
      25 October 2011 at 8:46 pm

      In 2008, Dunne beat Chauvel by 1,006 votes. Chauvel won 11,297 votes to Dunne’s 12,303 votes. If Chauvel had one as many votes as Labour won party votes (12,728) he would have won.

      So, it doesn’t need a swing to Labour, it just needs 504 Labour voters (fewer than 5%) to stop supporting Dunne and give their vote to Chauvel

      And I believe that Epsom is the wealthiest electorate in the country.

      • Mark 15.1.1
        26 October 2011 at 6:07 pm

        @Eddie: Ohariu is the richest – look it up.

        If there were polls showing Chauvel to win someone would have placed large amounts on iPredict a week or so ago when he was at 5% chance of winning after Kiwiblog made it their mission to make him look like a fool. If the polls existed, at least one National party staffer would have put a grand on Chauvel to pay out $20K in a month. Even now they can make over a 500% gain. It’s not like Dunne’s all that popular in National circles; they wouldn’t deprive themselves of such an investment out of loyalty.

        Labour on the otherhand has an ulterior motive in suggesting Chauvel is winning: people won’t vote for UF if they think it could be a wasted vote for the right. If Dunne brings only himself in, with Act increasingly looking like they won’t be back, National might not get the numbers. It’s a good – but dishonest – strategy.

        Why doesn’t the Dom Post just commission a poll so it can all be out in the public either way?

        • dazed & confused 15.1.1.1
          26 October 2011 at 6:21 pm

          @ Mark. ” after Kiwiblog made it their mission to make him look like a fool”. Is that really the way you saw it?

        • Colonial Viper 15.1.1.2
          2 November 2011 at 10:04 am

          It’s a good – but dishonest – strategy.

          wtf? A political party suggesting that their own candidate is ahead of the game in order to, amongst other things, try and suppress opposition turnout is somehow “dishonest”?

          What are you, 16 and participating in your first election campaign?

  16. Christian 16
    2 November 2011 at 9:52 am

    How good are your sources now Eddie? What happened to National at 45% and the Greens at 15%?

    • Colonial Viper 16.1
      2 November 2011 at 10:00 am

      National is down 5% in the Reid/TV3 poll, just as Eddie predicted.

      45% for the NATs comes on Election Day.

      Greens won’t get over 10% though. Although if they get 9.x% on the day, they should be over the moon. 11 or 12 MPs, nothing wrong with that.

      • Christian 16.1.1
        2 November 2011 at 10:28 am

        Eddie said National’s internal polling showed 45% last week, not on election day. Did Eddie actually get a leak, or was he taking one?

        • Colonial Viper 16.1.1.1
          2 November 2011 at 10:45 am

          Quote please.

          • insider 16.1.1.1.1
            2 November 2011 at 10:54 am

            It’s right at the top of the page so not hard to find

            “I’m told that the Nats own numbers show them down 5% since the Rena/double downgrade/S&P lies/throat-slitting clusterfuck hit them, which puts their support in the mid-40s.

            The big beneficiary has, as predicted, been the Greens who are at 15%. Labour’s on 30%.

            45% plays 45% with the minors making up the last 10%.”

            • Colonial Viper 16.1.1.1.1.1
              2 November 2011 at 10:58 am

              Thanks.

              Unless there is a publicly released poll out there which replicates the National Party survey technique we probably wont see the same numbers exactly.

              But we have seen a 5% drop from the blue team in publicly released polls.

              • insider …
                2 November 2011 at 11:09 am

                I wouldn’t get too hung up on that 5% drop; it appears to be a correction on an earlier rogue one which had the Nats way out front remember.

Links to post