Mt Roskill by election

Written By: - Date published: 4:35 am, December 3rd, 2016 - 167 comments
Categories: by-election - Tags: ,

michael-wood-6

Mt Roskill by election results should start to trickle in at about 8 or so.  The already voted result which should come through at 8:15 pm.

167 comments on “Mt Roskill by election ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. mickysavage 1
    3 December 2016 at 7:03 pm

    My personal view is that Labour’s on the ground game and Michael Wood’s far superior standing as a candidate in comparison to Parmar will mean that Labour will win this seat comfortably.

    It is not often I will go out on a limb and say this but the impression that I have received from on the ground is pretty strong.

    • Chris 1.1
      3 December 2016 at 7:13 pm

      Hope you’re correct, but regardless of competence, the party vote last time in Mt Roskill was overwhelmingly National, Goff’s majority went down considerably and whether you like it or not there are many on the right who regard Goff as one of them. Things mightn’t go to plan for Labour.

    • Anne 1.2
      3 December 2016 at 7:19 pm

      I sincerely hope you’re right ms. You usually are. A string of injuries on and off this year left me unable to physically participate in the byelection. Please keep us informed as the results roll in. Thanks.

    • Ad 1.3
      3 December 2016 at 7:43 pm

      Good on you Mickey for getting out there and doing the work on election day.

    • mosa 1.4
      3 December 2016 at 8:11 pm

      +100 Mickey

    • NZJester 1.5
      3 December 2016 at 9:49 pm

      Looks like you called it right. With each result coming in his lead is extending more and more. National are now coming up with all these excuses for not being able to take the seat from what they have tried to paint as a weak Labour Party. The fact they had more party votes for National in the seat last election should have seen this as a close race right down to the wire and not Labour pulling further and further away.

  2. BM 2
    3 December 2016 at 7:11 pm

    Why is Wood far superior?, compared to Parmars skill set he looks very average, no decent qualifications, no real skills or experience, looks like another head office bot who brings very little value to Parliament.

    At least with Parmar you get a bit of diversity instead of another white bread lackey.

    • One Two 2.1
      3 December 2016 at 7:23 pm

      Supporting racial diversity comment followed with a racial slur

      There is a small group of commentators here whose level is so low, and the intent , obvious

      I would say you’re at the absolute lowest level

      Well done!

    • mauī 2.2
      3 December 2016 at 8:05 pm

      You honestly prefer Parmar?… 😆

      She has an impressive list of achievements from being in parliament for 2 years. Yep… if anyone knows what they are send them on through…

      • BM 2.2.1
        3 December 2016 at 8:13 pm

        I saw a head to head comparing her skills and work experiences to Woods.

        She pisses all over him., so yeah I prefer Parmar.

        • ScottGN 2.2.1.1
          3 December 2016 at 8:20 pm

          She’s toast bro. National doesn’t like losers. She’ll be gone in no time.

        • Incognito 2.2.1.2
          3 December 2016 at 8:21 pm

          Oh yes, please enlighten us on her work experiences as a scientist?

        • mauī 2.2.1.3
          3 December 2016 at 8:21 pm

          Ok, those skills and experiences have left such a great impression that no one seems to know what they are, they must be good.

        • AB 2.2.1.4
          3 December 2016 at 9:54 pm

          Bah – “skills and work experience”. Like it’s a job interview where that sort of stale empty language is treated seriously.
          What matters in a politician is a a moral vision. See – Key hasn’t got one of those but BM could witter on endlessly about his “skills and work experience”. All those skills and all that experience directed at totally pointless and socially useless ends for the greater glory of Merrill Lynch. Spare me.

        • mickysavage 2.2.1.5
          3 December 2016 at 10:11 pm

          Are we talking about the same Parmjeet?

        • lprent 2.2.1.6
          4 December 2016 at 3:33 am

          You haven’t had the experience of watching Michael (or Julie for that matter) working. They aren’t mucheck on being flashy. But they are smart and dedicated to whatever they are working on and focused on whoever they are working for.

          I looked at Parmar and her quals, work experience, and exposure to the electorate and concluded she was that’s as soon as she was in the running.

          Basically it was the difference between being a politician for selfies in the way that Key promoted her campaign and being a good politician. Parmar simply doesn’the have the experience to do things like to tell Key to piss off out of a LOCAL electorate or at least to actually be helpful in what he did do.

    • ScottGN 2.3
      3 December 2016 at 8:06 pm

      Nice try. The problem, of course, with putting an incumbent list MP up as your candidate is that voters have a parliamentary skill set to assess. And on that score Parmar has been a very average MP. Add to that the massive fail over Wood’s fabricated “assault” early on in the campaign and I reckon it’s safe to say her parliamentary days are numbered.

    • greg 2.4
      3 December 2016 at 9:43 pm

      he won and whats her name lost and got totally walloped

    • Draco T Bastard 2.5
      4 December 2016 at 1:27 am

      Why is Wood far superior?

      He’s got the brains not to be a National Party member?

      compared to Parmars skill set

      Parmar shows all the signs of the Dunning-Kruger effect. But, we shouldn’t be surprised, that’s the case for all National candidates.

  4. Sanctuary 4
    3 December 2016 at 7:39 pm

    If labour wins in a landslide, it’ll be portrayed as business as usual and nothing for national to worry about. Anything else however will trigger another round of hyper critical bully pile ons by the governments sycophants in the corporate media.

  5. Ovid 5
    3 December 2016 at 7:42 pm

    http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/by2016/

    With 25% of the vote counted, Wood is picking up 2 votes for every 1 Parmar has. I didn’t follow the campaign closely, but she didn’t seem to be a very impressive candidate.

  6. Carolyn_nth 6
    3 December 2016 at 7:42 pm

    http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/by2016/

    Wood leads with 28% of vote counted

  7. swordfish 7
    3 December 2016 at 7:43 pm

    Meanwhile, in the Uk’s Richmond Park By-Election a couple of days ago, failed Tory London Mayoral candidate and former Conservative MP, Zac Goldsmith, loses his seat, with the Lib Dems pulling off one of the most spectacular political upsets of recent years and denting the Conservatives’ narrow majority in the House of Commons into the bargain.

    Lib Dem candidate Sarah Olney overturned Goldsmith’s massive 23,000 majority, at last year’s general election, to win by 1,800 votes.

    Richmond Park Labour voters doing what Labour voters used to do in 1990s Uk By-Elections in Blue areas where the Lib Dems had historically come second … voted strategically en masse .

    Now, back to Mt Roskill …

  8. swordfish 8
    3 December 2016 at 7:48 pm

    So, at this stage, roughly:

    Wood (Lab) 64%

    Parmar (Nat) 30%

    Wood currently doing even better than suggested by Labour’s Internal Mt Roskill poll – which had Wood 58 / Parmar 28

    • Pat 8.1
      3 December 2016 at 8:08 pm

      just a thought…assume neither CB nor RM did any publicly released polls for the by election?

      • swordfish 8.1.1
        3 December 2016 at 9:03 pm

        No. Pretty sure just Labour’s (publicly-released) Internal of Mt Roskill.

        (although you can bet the Nats got Farrar to do them one)

    • swordfish 8.2
      3 December 2016 at 8:13 pm

      Blimey !!! with 50% counted … Now

      Wood (Lab) 67%

      Parmar (Nat) 27%

      This is just a good old-fashioned drubbing.

      • swordfish 8.2.1
        3 December 2016 at 8:23 pm

        64% counted

        Wood (Lab) 66%

        Parmar (Nat) 28%

        • swordfish 8.2.1.1
          3 December 2016 at 8:31 pm

          79% counted

          Wood (Lab) 67%

          Parmar (Nat) 27%

          Things aint gonna change too much from here on in …

          • swordfish 8.2.1.1.1
            3 December 2016 at 8:52 pm

            Ha-Haaa, What’s the bet Young Master Farrar and chums will be busy spinning the notion that Labour’s majority has been slashed !!! from 8,100 to a mere 6,500 (in the process, ignoring the steep fall in turnout).

            2014 Election

            Goff (Lab) 57%

            Parmar (Nat) 32%

            .

            2016 By-Election

            Close to 100% counted

            Wood (Lab) 67% … + 10

            Parmar (Nat) 27% … – 5

  9. weka 9
    3 December 2016 at 7:51 pm

    Anyone know what the Electoral Commission has done with the 2014 election results? I can’t find it on their changed website.

    http://electionresults.govt.nz/ redirects to the by-election.

  10. Sanctuary 10
    3 December 2016 at 7:53 pm

    Getting a fresh face into parliament will be really good for Labour!

  11. WILD KATIPO 11
    3 December 2016 at 7:58 pm

    Lighten up , guys… itll be all right on the night….

  12. WILD KATIPO 12
    3 December 2016 at 8:01 pm

    Lighten up , guys,… itll be all right on the night…

  13. Carolyn_nth 13
    3 December 2016 at 8:05 pm

    What is the NAP party? – coming last

  14. chris73 14
    3 December 2016 at 8:09 pm

    Being that this was always going to be a Labour victory (sitting government yada yada) the victory for National has been the amount of money Labour has had to spend on this campaign which means less for the general election and its not like Labour has money to spare anyway

    • ScottGN 14.1
      3 December 2016 at 8:14 pm

      Was it always going to be a Labour victory? National were making positive noises early on, they sure thought they had a chance and their proxies in the media were pumping it as much as they could. But, let’s face it, it was another pretty terrible by-election campaign from Stephen Joyce.

      • chris73 14.1.1
        3 December 2016 at 8:45 pm

        I could be wrong but as I understand it no sitting Government had ever won a by-election in a seat it did not already hold and if I know this then I’m pretty sure National HQ knew it as well

        I think this whole exercise was designed to get Labour to spend money it didn’t need to on a by-election it was always going to win

        So all you have to do is calculate how much money Labour has which by all accounts isn’t much and subtract the cost of the by-election which normally it wouldn’t have needed to spend as much on and suddenly they have even less money to spend on the general election

        Or not.

        • ScottGN 14.1.1.1
          3 December 2016 at 8:52 pm

          You seem fixated by the money? Well how much did Trump have to spend compared to Clinton? And how did that work out?
          Give over bro, this was another disastrous by-election campaign from National. They squandered a real good chance to restore their parliamentary majority.

          • chris73 14.1.1.1.1
            3 December 2016 at 9:12 pm

            If you think that this heralds a new dawning for the Labour party then good on you, I don’t think it will but only time will tell

            • ScottGN 14.1.1.1.1.1
              3 December 2016 at 9:43 pm

              I don’t think I claimed it was a new dawn for anybody actually, but I do think it shows a fragility for National going into next year that’s not being reflected in opinion polling at the moment. Their brand is starting to get a bit dulled and even the PM can’t rescue a dud candidate. He spent most of last week telling us that a poor result would be terminal for Little’s leadership. Well that didn’t happen. All things being equal this is a loss for National given that they won the party vote in this seat at the last election.

              • Paul …
                3 December 2016 at 9:52 pm

                4500 votes is very fragile.

                • Paul Campbell …
                  3 December 2016 at 10:45 pm

                  yes but the turnout was half of a general election, that 4500 is equivalent to 9000 with twice the number of people voting

                • Matthew Whitehead …
                  4 December 2016 at 1:07 am

                  Wood won with 66.3% of the preliminary count.

                  In the 2014 general election, Goff won with 55.8% of electorate votes.

                  Even if you account for the lack of a Green candidate in the by-election and assume every single Green voter turned out for Wood, (in reality it’s unlikely that’s the case) Coates only got 5% of the vote in the general election. That means Wood turned out an extra 4.5% of the vote at minimum. He did very well in the electorate, and it bodes well for the General Election IMO.

                  (although arguably, Parmar was a terrible candidate who didn’t do a good job at empathy and social intelligence, but that’s like, half of the National caucus anyway…)

                  Whatever factors you consider as in play here, Wood turned out a lot of supporters for a by-election.

              • AB …
                3 December 2016 at 10:11 pm

                Nobody said it was a new dawn – you are doing the straw man thing again.
                It’s simply what happens when someone decent, personable and pretty smart goes up against an absolutely horrible candidate who looks and sounds aggressive and self-seeking.

        • Pat 14.1.1.2
          3 December 2016 at 8:53 pm

          or alternatively you could view it as the largest sample and most representative poll carried out this year ….800 odd telephone calls of dubious worth don’t compare to this swing.

    • Red Hand 14.2
      3 December 2016 at 8:33 pm

      t

    • AB 14.3
      3 December 2016 at 10:00 pm

      If you are concerned that they have none to spare you could donate some. You sound like a fair-minded sort of guy, why not even the game up a bit? All good eh?
      Oh wait – you actually want it to be unfairly tipped in favour of the party with the wealthiest supporters. Maybe that’s your definition of democracy – wealthy people buying influence and success?

    • mickysavage 14.4
      3 December 2016 at 10:17 pm

      Haha its all about the money? This is by far the cheapest successful by election I have ever seen.

    • Draco T Bastard 14.5
      4 December 2016 at 1:35 am

      Being that this was always going to be a Labour victory

      Dude, you did note that at the last election the party vote in that electorate was National didn’t you?

      This should have been a shoe in for National.

  15. mickysavage 15
    3 December 2016 at 8:10 pm

    Call it now it is all over. It is a thumping.

  16. Sanctuary 16
    3 December 2016 at 8:13 pm

    Farrar is pretending it isn’t happening…

  17. mosa 17
    3 December 2016 at 8:15 pm

    Sword Fish whats the latest numbers ?

  18. millsy 18
    3 December 2016 at 8:19 pm

    So much for the media saying it was going to be an upset National win with Andrew Little gone by Monday lunchtime.

  19. millsy 19
    3 December 2016 at 8:19 pm

    Why are my posts vanishing?

    [random bug that drops some comments into moderation – weka]

  20. Gristle 20
    3 December 2016 at 8:20 pm

    Another 1000 votes counted and it’s going to be all over.

  21. bruce 21
    3 December 2016 at 8:21 pm

    67/28 to labour 64% count

  22. Ric 22
    3 December 2016 at 8:22 pm

    looks like wood will get a bigger % of the vote than Goff

  23. Sanctuary 23
    3 December 2016 at 8:24 pm

    Good Lord it is a shellacking…

  24. mauī 24
    3 December 2016 at 8:24 pm

    Labour! Labour! Labour!

  25. Carolyn_nth 25
    3 December 2016 at 8:29 pm

    It’s all over bar the champagne corks popping.

  26. Rob 26
    3 December 2016 at 8:34 pm

    Tracey Watkins where are you when we need you??

  27. Gristle 27
    3 December 2016 at 8:34 pm

    So far Labour is polling at 67% of the vote. Last election Labour Green combined was 59.6% of the vote. At least a 7% swing to Lab/Green.

    • Incognito 27.1
      3 December 2016 at 8:59 pm

      Not quite, the Green Party did not stand a candidate this time.

      • Gristle 27.1.1
        3 December 2016 at 9:09 pm

        It is appropriate to add both the Labour and Green votes together specifically because the Greens did not stand a candidate. Otherwise the percentage swing to Labour would be even greater than the 7% given above., more like 9.5%. And that larger figure would be statistically less accurate.

        So go ahead choose which swing you want. Me, I’ll stick with 7%.

        • Incognito 27.1.1.1
          3 December 2016 at 9:35 pm

          It is a resounding win, that’s for sure.

          I don’t what is or is not appropriate but these are the facts:

          In 2014 Phil Goff got 56.5% and Barry Coates 5.1% and together 61.6%.

          In 2016 Michael Wood gets 66.5% (to be confirmed).

        • Matthew Whitehead 27.1.1.2
          4 December 2016 at 1:17 am

          It’s actually conservative to add both percentages together and then compare with the Labour result in the by-election, as not all Green electorate voters will have crossed over. (some of the people specifically vote for Green candidates because they won’t ever vote for a Labour candidate, for instance) It’s likely the delta is more than that.

          It suggests we could see a bigger party vote for Labour in Auckland next year if they do anywhere near as well as they did in the by-election.

  28. Anne 28
    3 December 2016 at 8:36 pm

    At 82.1% of the vote counted, Wood’s lead over Parmar is 5017. Looks like he will equal Goff’s 8000 majority.

    Congratulations to Michael Wood. Some of us picked him for big things 5 -10 years ago.

    • Sanctuary 28.1
      3 December 2016 at 8:39 pm

      I certainly liked his reaction to Parmar’s husband bad mouthing Julie Farley. I thought, now that is the sort of guy Labour needs to stick it to those Tory assholes.

      Don’t take any shit from the Nats!!!

  29. Incognito 29
    3 December 2016 at 8:38 pm

    I think somebody claimed here on TS that Mt Roskill was not a Labour stronghold but a Goff stronghold. Well, now it is a Wood stronghold 🙂

  30. mosa 30
    3 December 2016 at 8:41 pm

    Instead of heading bush Michael is off to parliament.

    Congratulations to the whole Labour team and well done Michael.

    A glimmer of light now forward to next year.

    Labour ” Its Time ” !

  31. ScottGN 31
    3 December 2016 at 8:42 pm

    I’m surprised National didn’t put more effort into this. If all the current polling we’re getting treated to is correct and going on the last election in this seat they could have managed something here with the right candidate and some well thought out overtures to Mt Roskill electors. It would have been an easy way to restore their majority in the House. The fact they didn’t suggests that, perhaps, it’s not quite as rosy on that side of politics as we’re lead to believe. Or maybe Stephen Joyce is just an idiot?

    • Incognito 31.1
      3 December 2016 at 8:47 pm

      It wasn’t National’s by-election to win but Labour’s to lose.

      I’d like to say that I respect how Phil Goff managed to keep ‘his nose clean’ in this by-election that would have meant much to him.

    • Gristle 31.2
      3 December 2016 at 8:55 pm

      Heavily contesting this election by National could have been seen as a dummy run for next year’s general election. Trouncing Wood would have given a great story to say that there is no alternative and that the actual election was done and dusted. Sucking Labour into this approach would have seen it have too invest more in the Mt Roskill campaign. (What would have the Green Party done? Help Labour financially?). Making it more difficult in the general election campaign.

      But this election was not played that way. National seems to have misjudged by flying in a candidate against a local. Perhaps internal polling showed it always to be losing.

      Even so, the story of National sleepwalking to a 4th term is disturbed. A 7% Labour/Green swing is enough to throw the 2017 election way open.

      Watch out for all the spin that will hit the msm.

    • greg 31.3
      3 December 2016 at 10:25 pm

      national put in a big effort john key campaigned in mt roskill for 7 days parmjeet parmer had hording everywhere they thought they were going i win but labour had hundreds of activists door knock today getting there voters out and it worked i think there was even greens helping as well make no mistake national has taken a real thumping to night

  32. Sanctuary 32
    3 December 2016 at 8:44 pm

    “…Or maybe Stephen Joyce is just an idiot..?”

    Occam’s razor favours this…

  33. Anne 33
    3 December 2016 at 8:44 pm

    Ta Gristle. On a percentage basis it will be at least equal to Goff. But:

    watch the MSM make a big thing of the fact his majority was 2500 (or whatever) less than Goff’s. The inference – he’s an inferior candidate.

    • Jenny Kirk 33.1
      3 December 2016 at 8:47 pm

      It looks like its going to be a great result, Anne. And I don’t think the MSM or Mr Key will like it one little bit !

  34. Rob 34
    3 December 2016 at 8:45 pm

    No it’s reflecting the total lack of empathy that Key and many in his party are displaying to our country
    High house prices No wage increases and a general lack of security for your and your families future

  35. Sanctuary 35
    3 December 2016 at 8:46 pm

    I’d just like to pause here and thank the electoral commission, who run our elections with a quiet, democratic efficiency that Americans can only dream about.

  36. Roflcopter 36
    3 December 2016 at 8:47 pm

    Wow, less than 30% turnout…

  37. Cinny 37
    3 December 2016 at 9:02 pm

    Is anyone able to fill me in on what happened today please? Some sort of protest, electoral commission doing a follow up on something. Thankies.

    Congrats Michael Wood 🙂 good work, boots on the ground pays off big time, big up’s to all involved, well done you fellas, really proud of everyone’s efforts, team work, awesomeness.

  38. The decrypter 38
    3 December 2016 at 9:06 pm

    Watery nats sun rising tomorrow.

  39. The Fairy Godmother 39
    3 December 2016 at 9:07 pm

    What’s the bet that the msm will be suggesting that it is time for key to step down due to National’s dismal performance in the bye-election.

    • mosa 39.1
      3 December 2016 at 9:11 pm

      Whats the bet the MSM will downplay the win saying he failed to reach the 8000 majority of Goff.

      And low turnout will be added in.

      Key…Akshully it was a safe Labour seat we did not expect to win.

      • mosa 39.1.1
        3 December 2016 at 9:30 pm

        Good to see my old electorate has used their common sense and elected a great guy for the seat and the party.

        Go Woodsy Go !!

  40. Rosemary McDonald 40
    3 December 2016 at 9:07 pm

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11759940

    Parmar and Joyce looking like one of their’s dog just savaged the other’s cat…

    and

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/87120705/live-mt-roskill-byelection

    Woods looking pleased, if a little humble…

    Jolly good show!

  41. Jester 41
    3 December 2016 at 9:10 pm

    I wouldn’t read to much in a by election with such a piss poor turn out.

    Looks likes lots a voters intend to keep their powder dry.

    • Jenny Kirk 41.1
      3 December 2016 at 9:16 pm

      There you see ….. dissing Labour has started already – despite previous Nat gloating at the start of the by-election that (a) Wood would get nowhere near the Goff majority of 6000 and (b) boundary changes made it less likely Wood would win !

      • Jester 41.1.1
        3 December 2016 at 9:26 pm

        Hi Jenny, knowing you can get a little bit hysterical I should point out my post was in no way dissing Labour at all. I’m excited for Michael and so pleased also that at last Andrew has had the opportunity to finally experience a night out celebrating a win at electoral level.

        • WILD KATIPO 41.1.1.1
          3 December 2016 at 9:36 pm

          Excited, are we?… well jilly jolly gosh … Im so excited that your excited too.

          Were all so excited,… except … a few Nat whingers and whiners on this post who need to harden up a bit.

          And my , my , my …. is Paula Bennett thinking she can now roll Joyce as Ms Fixit ?

          She sure seemed content in the link Rosemary provided…

        • Anne 41.1.1.2
          3 December 2016 at 9:36 pm

          I have never read anything resembling hysteria from Jenny Kirk. Quite the opposite. Perhaps if you had expressed your claimed pleasure at Michael’s win, then Jenny and others (including me) wouldn’t have concluded you were dissing Labour.

          • Jester 41.1.1.2.1
            3 December 2016 at 9:58 pm

            Speaking for everyone now are we Anne?

            Jenny and your failure in taking in what was said is no more my problem then yours by you engaging typing fingers before brain.

            That’s fine, I accept your apologies for over reacting.

        • mosa 41.1.1.3
          3 December 2016 at 10:00 pm

          Jester i think you misread the tone of Jennys comments.

          Its assertiveness not hysteria.

          And then happiness at the win tonight.

        • ScottGN 41.1.1.4
          3 December 2016 at 10:11 pm

          Putting your rather sexist use of the term ‘hysterical’ to one side I would have thought it was National who were a little bit desperate to experience a night out celebrating a win at electoral (by-election) level?

          • Jester 41.1.1.4.1
            3 December 2016 at 10:30 pm

            Haha. Don’t get your panties in a bunch Scott. No sexism intended in my comment. If you have deemed hysterical as indicating ala femine I’d suggest you need to get out and meet more men 😉

      • greg 41.1.2
        3 December 2016 at 10:37 pm

        i met couple ladies from espom who are now glad to be in mt roskill and have woods as there mp rather than that god awful Seymour

    • Hanswurst 41.2
      3 December 2016 at 9:17 pm

      Keep their powder dry for what? So that their votes count for more at the next general election? That’s not how it works, you know…

      • Jester 41.2.1
        3 December 2016 at 9:34 pm

        Hi Hanwort. I was inferring that the low turnout is probably attributed to people not seeing a bi-election as important as a general election. And by the way…that’s exactly how it works. Please feel free to google turnouts for bi-elections per electorate versus turnout for general election per electorate.

        • ScottGN 41.2.1.1
          3 December 2016 at 9:48 pm

          Except that isn’t that a massive fail on National’s part? since they thought they were in for a chance and winning this would have restored their majority in the House for the rest of this parliament?

          • Jester 41.2.1.1.1
            3 December 2016 at 10:33 pm

            National and its coalition partners have a majority in the house Scott. Do please keep up.

        • mosa 41.2.1.2
          3 December 2016 at 9:53 pm

          Jester its by- election.

        • Hanswurst 41.2.1.3
          4 December 2016 at 2:47 am

          I have no idea what that has to do with keeping one’s powder dry. Feel free to Google the expression and obtain an understanding of what it means.

    • Incognito 41.3
      3 December 2016 at 9:46 pm

      LOL! The voters don’t want to have to put in a claim with ACC for OOS because of voting more than twice in one year! You suit your nom de plume.

      • Jester 41.3.1
        3 December 2016 at 9:52 pm

        No one mentioned acc mr incognito. I just mentioned that people don’t see bi elections as important.

    • NZJester 41.4
      3 December 2016 at 10:38 pm

      With the fact National had a majority in the party votes last election in this seat it should have been a much closer race coming down to the wire for Labour even with a low turnout. National is going on about how weak of a party Labour is via their many mouth pieces and tame MSM. This shows just how much of a lie that is. Far from being week, Labour is stronger than ever.

  42. Thinkerr 42
    3 December 2016 at 9:16 pm

    All credit to Michael Wood and all the people who got stuck in and made the result what it is.

    But it can’t only be about personalities. With Northland showing how the regions think and Roskill as an indicator for Auckland, surely BM can’t be the only one doing BMs tonight.

  43. Rosemary McDonald 43
    3 December 2016 at 9:25 pm

    “A full 100 per cent of the votes have now been counted. Labour’s Michael Wood has 11,170 votes, while National’s Parmjeet Parmar has 4652.”

    Stuff

  44. jaymam 44
    3 December 2016 at 9:33 pm

    Congratulations Michael Wood! The other candidates seemed bloody hopeless.

  45. Paul 45
    3 December 2016 at 9:49 pm

    Only 4500 for National.
    That’s about 8% of the electorate, right?
    Joyce must be packing it.

  46. Psycho Milt 46
    3 December 2016 at 9:58 pm

    Woohoo! Congratulations, Michael Wood, and if you’re reading this, congratuiations Julie Fairey – from the news reports it looked like you had to bite your tongue through some near-lethal levels of bullshit from various people and news media during this campaign.

  47. WILD KATIPO 47
    3 December 2016 at 9:58 pm

    Matthew Hooton @MatthewHootonNZ
    That’s a terrible result by Parmar in #MtRoskill. @AndrewLittleMP safe to election. Parmar won’t be heard of again. #nzpol
    7:39 PM – 3 Dec 2016

  48. swordfish 48
    3 December 2016 at 10:02 pm

    Revealing Fact:

    If everyone who voted for the Government in Mt Roskill at the 2014 General Election (ie those Party-Voting Nat / ACT / Maori / UF / Cons) had given their support to National’s Parmar at this By-Election … and if all 2014 Opposition Party voters (Lab / Green / IMP / NZF) had voted for Wood, then the % would have been:

    Wood (Lab) … 52%

    Parmar (Nat) … 48%

    .

    Whereas, the actual Preliminary Final Result is:

    Wood (Lab) … 66%

    Parmar (Nat) … 28%

    • Pat 48.1
      3 December 2016 at 10:09 pm

      revealing indeed….. is this a NZ/Auckland wide trend will be interesting to discover…..and certainly flies in the face of recent polling

      • AB 48.1.1
        3 December 2016 at 10:23 pm

        Don’t get your hopes up. Parmar was an awful candidate. Different in a General once Key pops out a few “akshullys” for the delight of the punters. Nobody is going to extrapolate by asking the question of why such a horrible candidate found a natural home in the National Party.

        • Pat 48.1.1.1
          3 December 2016 at 10:35 pm

          there are a multitude of horrible candidates, many of them Ministers however it is the movement AWAY from government support that is telling….it is larger than could reasonably be expected from the usual by election bias and this is from a background of supposed increasing gov support and weak opposition according to recent polling.

          Does it indicate a general election result? obviously not but it certainly casts (more) doubt on the veracity of the polls

    • mosa 48.2
      3 December 2016 at 10:20 pm

      Thats interesting Swordfish.

      By-election behaviour is always different than a general election.

      With the two party block figure the percentage is 4% difference for the left , a win but still close.

      Although 66% in the preliminary is a great result.

      How would this play out nationally in a FPP Election ?

  49. Instauration 49
    3 December 2016 at 10:20 pm

    Phil phoned my Mum on her 09-627 number.
    The “electorate office” called back on same day – tell us more about your concerns.
    Very well done Mt Roskill Labour Machine !
    My Mum, historically Labour !!, and despite Subgen corruption and too many marbles – astute.
    Boom!!

  50. red-blooded 50
    3 December 2016 at 10:22 pm

    Congrats to Michael Wood MP and to the wider Labour team. This result helps to vindicate Goff’s decision to stand aside and run for mayor, and it’s notable how many mayors of our major cities either ran on a Labour ticket or had strong Labour links. Of course, turnout is lower for those elections, too, but the motivated people vote.

    Now Labour needs to look at pulling in more of the less motivated. There was someone on this site a day or two ago taunting people about being a swinging voter and saying she had more power than people with fixed political values. She was being bloody annoying, but she was also right, to a certain extent. Some people will always vote Labour/left, and those people need to be valued and to see their values reflected in the policies and decisions of the party, but not at the cost of attracting Mr and Ms In-the-Middle. Clark understood that (and got criticised for not being radical enough) – but over the course of three terms she and her team achieved a lot for NZ as a whole and for vulnerable NZers in particular. Key has also understood it and (though I can’t stand him) he’s managed to take the centre voters with him.

    But enough pontificating – happy, happy, happy!

  51. adam 51
    3 December 2016 at 10:31 pm

    Interesting side note: Was in the Zookeepers Daughter last night and his royal ponytail puller came in with his canditate. Now it’s the first time, I’ve seen him avoid parts of the room. Yeah there was the usual people wanting photos with him, but those who looked like they did real work for a living, he ignored. Also funny quite a few hateful glears at him. Again unusual, for the royal ponytail puller, normally it’s league fans, and queer folk who give him shit.

    Our cornor was ignored, could have been the wee ditty – we got 29 reason to hate key, don’t seal them up — that rang out a few times.

  52. swordfish 52
    3 December 2016 at 10:47 pm

    Dear oh dear !, They’re not taking this slap-in-the-face terribly well over at Kiwiblog.

    A few comments from that highly-esteemed organ:

    Actually the PM has better things to do with his time than try and pander to the losers who live in the shithole called Mt. Roskill.
    The General Election will be won in places that are populated by people with a degree of intelligence.

    How many Mt Roskill residents didn’t let their wives out to vote.

    very changed demographics in the new seat of ‘Mt. Somalia’, apathy by the diminishing number of Nats who still live in the bloody dump, not really a surprise..

    There you go, Mt Roskill … that’s National Voters’ frank, unvarnished, sincerely-held view of you and your family.

    • WILD KATIPO 52.1
      3 December 2016 at 11:05 pm

      Crikey !!! … those guys sound like a pit full of starving Taipans… makes us Katipo’s look like rank beginners…

    • mosa 52.2
      3 December 2016 at 11:32 pm

      The mask has slipped.

      These people are the real National party ,the same people selling the brighter future the biggest con job since the Decent Society in 1990 to New Zealanders.

      The people they rely on to support them are the ones with the lack of intelligence.

      And unfortunately they vote.

    • Incognito 52.3
      4 December 2016 at 12:57 am

      I am glad this is in full view and for everyone to see & access (and respond to). There also is a point to make in favour of online anonymity. For some people it can be liberating and cathartic to express their views online and others love to wallow in ‘filth’; each to their own or should that be live and let live?

  53. The Chairman 53
    3 December 2016 at 11:43 pm

    One hopes this win doesn’t fool Labour into believing they don’t have any problems.

    This isn’t the time to become complacent.

    • Incognito 53.1
      4 December 2016 at 1:07 am

      I agree, but it does give Labour a much-needed taste of ‘winning’, which is a boost to morale and confidence that cannot be underestimated. I hope it will re-calibrate some of the MSM as well.

      I think Labour is heading into a very challenging and exciting year; if they can maintain a sense of humour and fun they’ll pull through o.k. I also think Andrew Little has a calming and stabilising & consolidating effect on the Labour caucus, which is perhaps not too surprising given his background.

      • The Chairman 53.1.1
        4 December 2016 at 6:11 am

        “It does give Labour a much-needed taste of ‘winning”’

        Indeed.

        Nevertheless, while I also agree Labour is heading into a very challenging year, at this stage, there is little for them or voters to be excited about.  

        Policy to date is lacking and failing to resonate while their delivery requires a lot of improvement.

        Therefore, unless they got something new to pull out of their hat which they can deliver well and get voters excited, they are going to be in a heap of trouble come election day.

  54. James 54
    3 December 2016 at 11:50 pm

    Well done to woods. Congrats.

  55. James 55
    4 December 2016 at 1:33 am

    I think my earlier post disappeared.

    Regardless trying again. Congratulations to woods. He was the better candidate, ran the better campaign and is the deserved winner.