NZF is finished

Written By: - Date published: 8:43 am, August 11th, 2017 - 104 comments
Categories: election 2017, nz first - Tags: , , ,

Here’s a reckon for you. NZF will fall below 5% this election.

Winston is swanning about the place still making bold claims, but the latest UMR poll has NZF support cut in half, from 16 percent down to 8.

I think as Labour gains strength it will continue to win back supporters from NZF. As National seems threatened other NZF voters will rally back to them. Winston’s party could get squeezed out from both sides.

After all, why would you vote for a “kingmaker” who won’t tell you what you’re voting for?

104 comments on “NZF is finished ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. dukeofurl 1
    11 August 2017 at 8:57 am

    If the Greens make 6 so would NZF, TOP arent going to make 5

    • Carolyn_nth 1.1
      11 August 2017 at 9:00 am

      Just looks like Tim Murphy’s wish list.

    • Bearded Git 1.2
      11 August 2017 at 9:50 am

      Greens have polled around 10-11% for SIX YEARS now (come in Swordfish), excluding the odd blip. I wish James Shaw would say this a few times in the media. They now have an absolute core base of 8% which has become more staunch over the MT resignation.

      It may just be me but NZF have seemed a bit short of ideas in this campaign so far, but then we are all perhaps forgetting that it has hardly started yet.

      • dukeofurl 1.2.1
        11 August 2017 at 10:28 am

        The polls have come up different this week. Dont really know what Murphy bases his numbers on.
        TOP has a lot of overlap with Greens- once things settle down some of their soft support will drift back rather than unknowns like TOP.
        Remember the Greens just made 5% first time on their own but were well known before that and were part of Alliance

        • Dennis Frank 1.2.1.1
          11 August 2017 at 10:54 am

          I joined the Greens after the 1990 election because they got 7%. That was under FPP. Since then the leftist hegemony at the upper levels of the party has rocketed GP polling right up to 8%, providing a dramatic illustration of just how effective the political application of leftist thought actually is. It’s a tremendous track record sustained over that 27 year period. Someone should give Metiria a medal for her contribution to it.

          • Muttonbird 1.2.1.1.1
            11 August 2017 at 11:04 am

            That’s a pretty selective reading of the numbers. The ‘leftist hegemony’ as you describe it pulled the Greens from 5%-7% in elections 1999-08 to 10%-11% in 2011 and 2014. Then they poll 15% recently before the media and the traditional bene-bashing NZ rump attacked them.

            I’d say they are trending up in real terms from the one track party you seemed to be happy with all those years ago.

            • Stuart Munro 1.2.1.1.1.1
              11 August 2017 at 11:20 am

              I’d say that the Green domination of the news cycle will lift their profile in the long term, and people who learn their policies and personalities are often pleasantly surprised.

              The Greens have shown leadership instead of glamour, and glamour always disappoints. As the chronic economic incompetence of the neo-liberal parties progressively impoverishes more and more New Zealanders the search for real alternatives is more often than not going to lead to the Greens.

        • RedLogix 1.2.1.2
          11 August 2017 at 11:03 am

          I agree dol. 5% in a now crowded market is a tough ask for any new party. It’s impossible unless you have a wealthy backer and even when you run a decent campaign, as TOP have so far, it’s not easy.

          I totally agree they have a significant overlap with the Greens, but equally they’re definitely drawing attention from otherwise conservative voters who can see how lazy and venal National have become and can’t stomach voting for Winston.

          How large that group becomes will determine their fate.

          http://www.top.org.nz/the_environment_should_never_have_been_a_left_wing_issue

          • Ad 1.2.1.2.1
            11 August 2017 at 11:36 am

            Although it would suck a little if TOP took just enough vote off Greens for neither Greens nor TOP to get in.

            Having said that, it’s a competitive sport.

            • RedLogix 1.2.1.2.1.1
              11 August 2017 at 11:44 am

              Indeed, which is why an Electoral Commission a while back recommended dropping the electoral coat-tailing provision and lowering the 5% threshold.

              Memory fails me on the details, but of course too many vested interests in Parliament for that to fly.

              • The Lone Haranguer …
                11 August 2017 at 1:46 pm

                RL, we dont need (and I dont want) the thresh hold lowered below 5%

                Looking at historical voting the lowering of the thresh hold to 3% would have altered the representation in three elections out of the seven held thus far:

                1996 Graham Capill would have got into parliament with the Christian Coalitions gaining 4.33%

                2008 Winston Peters would have got into parliament with NZ First gaining 4.07%

                2014 Colin Craig would have got into parliament with the Conservatives gaining 3.97%

                Holding the 5% may not be as pure democracy, but it does tend to keep the nutters outside the parliamentary gate. And I think thats a good thing

                • RedLogix …
                  11 August 2017 at 2:41 pm

                  That’s fine. Maybe you should’ve argued that with the Electoral Commission.

                  • The Lone Haranguer …
                    11 August 2017 at 4:14 pm

                    I guess you are committed to more small group representation & Im committed to putting a fair height on the hurdle to keep nutters at bay.

                    And thats okay.

                • AB …
                  11 August 2017 at 4:31 pm

                  If you believe in democracy I don’t see how you can shut down the opinions of 4.9% of the population (nearly 1 person in 20) because you fear they are nutters.
                  Give them their time in the sun, and if they truly act like nutters then their time in the sun will be pretty short-lived.
                  I’d be happy with 3% which is a pretty cautious adjustment.

                  • The Lone Haranguer …
                    11 August 2017 at 4:39 pm

                    I guess I see the 5% thresh hold as something of a protection for voters.

                    Given that with FPP, that a group at around 10% or so was often unable to win seats, I see 5% as being a fair compromise.

                    And I see the 5% has kept both Capill and Craig away from parliament and I think thats a good thing.

                  • KJT …
                    12 August 2017 at 12:21 pm

                    Worked with ACT, and The Dunne party.

                    Had their time in the sun, showed what idiots they were and dropped to below 1%.

                    Should get rid of the coattails provision and make 3% the threshold however.

                • DS …
                  12 August 2017 at 12:04 pm

                  You can’t design electoral systems to keep out people you don’t like. If 4% of the population want Colin Craig, they can have Colin Craig.

          • Draco T Bastard 1.2.1.2.2
            11 August 2017 at 1:26 pm

            The Environment should never have been a Left Wing Issue

            But it became so because the right-wing are always in denial of reality. It became an even bigger problem when Labour went right-wing back in the 1980s and also started actively denying reality.

            TOP doesn’t really shift much from that denial when they say that the environment is there only to make money.

            • RedLogix 1.2.1.2.2.1
              11 August 2017 at 2:49 pm

              TOP doesn’t really shift much from that denial when they say that the environment is there only to make money.

              If someone misrepresented the Greens like that I’m sure you’d have something emphatic to say would you not?

              http://www.top.org.nz/top3

              Don’t bother responding unless you have read the link and can quote the part where it unambigouously says “environment is there only to make money”.

              And then justify that claim in the context of the whole policy.

            • Bearded Git 1.2.1.2.2.2
              11 August 2017 at 4:03 pm

              The very fact that TOP says this shows they are supporting the Right.

              Sam Morgan and Gareth Morgan (as partial shareholder) have wrecked an excellent consented plan for a low-impact subdivision at the mouth of the Cardrona Valley near Wanaka that eventuated from an Environment Court decision a few years ago

              Instead the Morgan’s went to the High Court to gain consent for a much more visually intrusive and less sustainable development that they justified by reference to an atrociously poor decision by Council years before.

              They can claim no environmental credentials. They will never have my vote.

              In fact both of them and the Maori Party (who helped wreck the RMA by supporting National’s changes to it) can rot in hell.

              • RedLogix …
                11 August 2017 at 6:35 pm

                Less than minor

                https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/queenstown-lakes/station-development-plans-back-hearing-table

                But I can tell your ‘rot in hell’ pathology is really important to you, and I sincerely hope it brings you happiness.

                • Bearded Git …
                  11 August 2017 at 11:44 pm

                  Nicely researched-I have copies of all of the cases if you would like them.

                  I’m not sure what you mean by “less than minor” but the 37-lot development referred to in the article originally contained no residential building platforms (RBP) when consented by Council (A QLDC planner resigned in disgust at the decision to grant these lots-prefer not to mention names). The EC then ruled (Judge Jackson) that the 37 lots had no development rights because they had no RBP.

                  It was after this that Infinity Investments bought Hillend Station and devised a clever sustainable development that protected around 90% of the the station from future development while permitting lots of development (houses, commercial and vineyard) with considerable areas of native vegetation either protected or proposed to be planted. This was after an EC hearing of about 2 weeks (Judge Kenderdine). The EC sustainable resolution was only achieved after various parties and community groups pushed in the EC for a sustainable solution.

                  The Morgan’s, using their vast financial resources, then decided to ignore this and go back to the awful non-sustainable 37-lot option, convincing the High Court and a largely supine Council to go along with a decision now permitting RBP on the 37 lots. Under this decision none of the station, and its considerable indigenous vegetation, is protected from future development. Neither is there regeneration per the Kenderdine decision. A very poor outcome for Wanaka and NZ.

                  That is the long version of what I said before. The newspaper article you reference fails to accurately report the above process-that is par for the course.

                  Perhaps rot in hell is a bit strong but you get the drift.

                  • Bearded Git …
                    12 August 2017 at 11:07 am

                    Ah I see the “less than minor”….but there the planner is comparing a development that has consent for 37 RBP’s (the permitted baseline after the Morgan’ HC case) with the 37 residences outcome that being put forward by the Morgans. The comparison is not with the sustainable EC decision I describe above which is much better for NZ.

                    I repeat the Morgans used their dosh to wreck a sustainable EC outcome and replace it with one that over time will have considerable higher adverse effects.

                    But that’s ok because the Morgans will make more money out of the HC outcome and they really need that. (sarc)

      • infused 1.2.2
        11 August 2017 at 4:42 pm

        Yes, but Labour have been shit for the last 9 years. Labour are likely going to claw back all the lost votes.

  2. ScottGN 2
    11 August 2017 at 8:59 am

    Doesn’t this ignore the fact that Winston’s likely to win Northland? In which case regardless of their party vote they’ll be back in the parliament.

    • r0b 2.1
      11 August 2017 at 9:08 am

      You’re right, it does. Likely Peters will win Northland so they will be back. Rephrased to – fall below 5%.

      • JanM 2.1.1
        11 August 2017 at 10:29 am

        And who knows what will happen with Shane Jones in Whangarei if the two of them work together? Shane Reti is something of a personality-free zone, so it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that NZF could split the vote and sneak through, is it?

    • Enough is Enough 2.2
      11 August 2017 at 9:10 am

      True – I had forgotten that

    • Graeme 2.3
      11 August 2017 at 9:32 am

      There’s also a possibility that Mark Patterson could take Clutha Southland.

      • r0b 2.3.1
        11 August 2017 at 9:50 am

        Even given the turmoil there that does seem unlikely.

        • Graeme 2.3.1.1
          11 August 2017 at 10:50 am

          Lots of rumours around that the old Nat electoral organisation in C-S has gone over to NZF.

          Can’t see the party vote changing that much but expect the electorate to punish the National Party in the electorate vote.

          • katipo 2.3.1.1.1
            11 August 2017 at 6:21 pm

            I had the feeling the not matter who the National put up (even if it were TB again) they would get in – would be nice to be proved wrong though, after all folks, you can still party-vote wherever.

      • The Lone Haranguer 2.3.2
        11 August 2017 at 11:01 am

        A blue swede could still win that electorate for National – it seems that one did at the last election anyway.

    • Andre 2.4
      11 August 2017 at 11:10 am

      Winston “likely” to win Northland?

      Hmmm, in the by-election there were lots of reasons for Labour and Green voters to strategically vote Winston to shut out Osborne. Plus there was the Sabin stench still wafting around, possibly discouraging some Nat turnout. Those factors will be gone for this election.

      So looking at the 2014 and 2015 results, it looks to me that it’s more likely Northland will go back to blue. Winston’s margin doesn’t lookk big enough to survive those strategic votes mostly going back to Labour and Greens.

      http://archive.electionresults.govt.nz/2015_northland_byelection/

      http://archive.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2014/electorate-35.html

      • ScottGN 2.4.1
        11 August 2017 at 11:39 am

        There will be some new factors in play though. Like how if it looks increasingly likely that National will only be able to hold on to office with NZF in the mix National voters in Northland may well decide to split their 2 votes.

      • Draco T Bastard 2.4.2
        11 August 2017 at 1:32 pm

        Hmmm, in the by-election there were lots of reasons for Labour and Green voters to strategically vote Winston to shut out Osborne.

        I don’t think those reasons have changed. Neither Labour nor the Greens are going to win it so it’s probably best if they do vote for Winston. At least he comes with the possibility that he’ll support a Labour led government.

        And how has his performance in Northland been?

        So looking at the 2014 and 2015 results, it looks to me that it’s more likely Northland will go back to blue.

        NZ1st are blue through and through. It’s a different shade, not a different colour.

  3. Enough is Enough 3
    11 August 2017 at 9:00 am

    That is the best result for the left and one that I have been advocating for.

    I can’t see it becoming a reality though.

  4. Bob 4
    11 August 2017 at 9:06 am

    This is MMP, let’s all get used to it, proportional representation is the only way MMP works, that’s why we voted for it.
    Tim Murphy wish list indeed.
    Not gunna happen.

  5. AsleepWhileWalking 5
    11 August 2017 at 9:06 am

    It’s premature to try and predict the outcome in this election. The next fortnight should be interesting.

  6. roy cartland 6
    11 August 2017 at 9:12 am

    I could live with Labour at 39%, Greens at, oh a healthy 15% and the option to absorb any worthwhile TOP, MP or NZF suggestions.

    • alwyn 6.1
      11 August 2017 at 9:23 am

      “I could live with”.
      I don’t like the tone of that statement, at least when it is read with the party percentages you want.

      I hope that the alternative to the statement is not true because if it is you are not going to see the end of September. Labour 39% AND Greens on 15%? Either of them is very unlikely. The combination of the two simply isn’t going to happen.
      As that Australian comedy ‘The Castle’ said “Tell him he’s dreaming”.

      [RL: Deleted. Unnecessary tone.]

  7. DH 7
    11 August 2017 at 9:21 am

    “After all, why would you vote for a “kingmaker” who won’t tell you what you’re voting for?”

    I really don’t understand this attitude. NZ First is an independent political party with its own agendas. As a minor party it won’t be able to implement all its policies so the influence it will have in a coalition Government depends entirely on how many votes it gets and how good a negotiator Peters is.

    Peters will run with whomever offers his party the most and those offers won’t come until the election is over. He can’t reveal who he’d go into coalition with because the negotiations haven’t begun. It’s what Peters has always done and it’s a perfectly sensible and reasonable approach. That’s what MMP is about.

    • r0b 7.1
      11 August 2017 at 9:29 am

      I really don’t understand this attitude.

      We really don’t understand each other!

      If NZF was “kingmaker” they would have at best have minor influence within the next government. Voting for them you are voting for an agenda that is 90% someone else’s. And you don’t know which one.

      • DH 7.1.1
        11 August 2017 at 9:59 am

        Hey I didn’t invent MMP. I just live here.

        To some voters Peter’s positioning makes sense. He could be a spoiler for National’s looting or he could disrupt Labour’s tendency to authoritarianism. For those who dislike both major parties it could be a win either way.

        • Dennis Frank 7.1.1.1
          11 August 2017 at 11:00 am

          You’re quite right. Commentators have made this point after prior elections, when it became apparent that swing-voters were using NZF to slam the brakes on the major left/right parties, so as to produce a more centrist government.

        • Draco T Bastard 7.1.1.2
          11 August 2017 at 1:36 pm

          He could be a spoiler for National’s looting or he could disrupt Labour’s tendency to authoritarianism.

          Labour is significantly less authoritarian than NZ1st.

      • The Lone Haranguer 7.1.2
        11 August 2017 at 11:13 am

        Like it or not, Peters has a stranglehold on the “we need a hero to keep the bastards honest” sector of the electorate.

        It matters not that his NO was actually a YES

        It matters not that they have no idea who he will back on 24 September – hes a security blanket.

    • greywarshark 7.2
      11 August 2017 at 6:58 pm

      “NZ First is an independent political party with its own agendas. ”
      It would be good if commenters could say truthfully – New Zealanders are independent people deciding on their own agendas.

  8. gsays 8
    11 August 2017 at 9:28 am

    in respect to peters and post election deals, why the constant reference to kingmaker?
    surely now queenmaker is at least as likely.
    i have seen this reference (queenmaker) once but that was before metiria’s retirement.

    • The Lone Haranguer 8.1
      11 August 2017 at 1:55 pm

      Hes a kingmaker because the king will be either Bill or Winston himself.

      I just cant see him agreeing to having a PM who hasnt had previous cabinet experience when he himself has all the necessary experience.

      I dont think hes mysognist tho others may disagree.

  9. Jeremy 9
    11 August 2017 at 9:30 am

    I think the proposition that TOP will out-poll NZF is fanciful.

    • Janet 9.1
      11 August 2017 at 10:35 am

      Is it ? Unless Winston does state which party he will align with, I will vote TOP

      • DoublePlusGood 9.1.1
        11 August 2017 at 11:59 am

        So you are voting to keep the current government, but have it now pretend that it is more economically progressive?

      • Draco T Bastard 9.1.2
        11 August 2017 at 1:37 pm

        I hadn’t heard that TOP had announced which party they will align with.

        • dukeofurl 9.1.2.1
          11 August 2017 at 1:50 pm

          Yep
          “We’re happy to work with either, we respect both.”

          Janet doesnt want a NZF because its a fence sitter but prefers TOP fence sitting instead.
          Duh !

  10. Daniel Eyre 10
    11 August 2017 at 9:34 am

    You people have been predicting this for over 20 years.
    Somehow Winston is still there.

    Maybe there’s truths about the NZ electorate some of you don’t like to admit? Perhaps some of you need to stop living in the world of fanciful and instead move to factual?

    I predict that Winston will still be in parliament after next election, especially given how people are really, finally tiring of National.

    And before anyone begins: I have never voted for the guy and are not likely ever to.

  11. Anne 11
    11 August 2017 at 9:47 am

    Never, never count Winnie and NZ First out – never. He’ll have something up his sleeve as an insurance. Like releasing the Barclay texts?

  12. Glenn 12
    11 August 2017 at 9:56 am

    He hasn’t started yet. Give him a few weeks. He may choose to sit on the cross benches and control parliament if he gets enough votes.

  13. Ad 13
    11 August 2017 at 10:07 am

    NZF are the Undead.

    They can’t die.

    • Yabby 13.1
      11 August 2017 at 10:18 am

      They’ve died before

      • Cemetery Jones 13.1.1
        11 August 2017 at 10:26 am

        “What is dead cannot die, but rises again, harder and stronger.”

      • The Lone Haranguer 13.1.2
        11 August 2017 at 11:32 am

        Winston is the ultimate political zombie.

        Hes come back from the dead once already and resurrected NZF, and I would think with the Greens fiasco on everyones minds, that a Labour/NZF coalition with the Greens again on the outside looking in is the most likely outcome – at this point.

        But that said, none of us could have predicted the changes of the past couple of weeks,

  14. mpledger 14
    11 August 2017 at 10:08 am

    When the dust has settled around the Greens then Winston will start hammering Bill English with the text messages again. There wasn’t much point this week except to keep it on low simmer.

    • RedLogix 14.1
      11 August 2017 at 10:49 am

      True enough, still if there is substance to these texts I can just see Gower and Hoskings sorrowfully declaring “we’ve had enough turmoil this election, enough witch hunting, enough ‘gotcha politics’ … lets concentrate on issues that matter to ordinary New Zealanders” …. and then smear Winston as a trouble-maker.

      • Devo 14.1.1
        11 August 2017 at 11:50 am

        Oh jeez, I can picture it already..

        • Draco T Bastard 14.1.1.1
          11 August 2017 at 1:40 pm

          Yeah, so can I. The MSM seem willing to do anything to keep National in power.

          • red-blooded 14.1.1.1.1
            11 August 2017 at 3:10 pm

            The media don’t care who’s in power – they just want to good story. The definition of a good story is usually defined by conflict and controversy. Why would “the MSM” want to keep one party in power? How are they advantaged by this?

            Individuals within the media have political opinions and some of them are irresponsible or unbalanced in the way they promote those opinions or the way they interact with people and frame stories, but there is no secret club called “the mainstream media” with rules about what to believe.

            I have a brother who worked for several years in the Press Gallery. I didn’t always agree with his view of the events of the day, but he sure as hell wasn’t working for some cabal that was trying to distort our understanding and keep us duped about political issues. He was, as James Shaw has observed today, just doing his job.

            • Draco T Bastard 14.1.1.1.1.1
              11 August 2017 at 8:14 pm

              Why would “the MSM” want to keep one party in power? How are they advantaged by this?

              One party works for the rich and powerful – the people who own and control our MSM.

              but there is no secret club called “the mainstream media” with rules about what to believe.

              Except there is although not necessarily direct:

              Our idea of power, as both capacity and coercion, involves not only preferences but also interests causing outcomes. If an individual has interests — arrangements of the world that are better for him or her than others — that individual does not have to make those interests conscious in the form of preferences for the interests to cause outcomes. The long-term interests of the more powerful can create situations in which others act to produce outcomes that further those interests because the others think that they may be rewarded for those actions. In other words, others can anticipate the powerful individual’s preferences without the individual actually having to have those preferences. A housewife in the 1950s, for example, may have kept the children quiet and away from their father while he read the newspaper, without her ever having asked or his having had to consider whether or not he preferred the power dynamic that placed his desires first in the household.

              And Murdock is known to give direct instructions to his editors.

          • North 14.1.1.1.2
            11 August 2017 at 4:24 pm

            If Winston attacks them hard they’d have to come out from cover. Oh the spectacle !

      • SpaceMonkey 14.1.2
        11 August 2017 at 2:37 pm

        That hadn’t even crossed my mind until I read that. Please, no!

  15. reason 15
    11 August 2017 at 11:57 am

    If Winston gets Bill english deposed ……………… that would make him a double king slayer.

    And i posted this in open Mike but it should really be in this thread …..

    ************************************************************

    Is Winston starting to get ‘official’ recognition ….. for his stealth dispatching of key.

    ” John Key shocked the nation on December 5, resigning to hand over to English, in part because he thought it would be easier for English to do a deal with Peters.” https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2017/08/09/42006/metiria-jacinda-quake

    Being credited as the man who got rid of Key must be worth a rise in Winstons popularity ….

    Single handed, he did what three elections and the combined opposition were unable to ….

    When the warden of the north ………. became a genuine king slayer.

    NZ likes tough and strong leaders ……. NZF should play on this.

    ***********************************

    With key being neck deep in tax haven type stuff …… Winston has a good solid theme to build around …. getting rid of the corrupt king …

    But Helping to clean up the National from being the tax haven and corruption party is unfinished business for him…..

    • stigie 15.1
      11 August 2017 at 12:16 pm

      When Key said he would not have him in a government that he was leading, that impacted on Winston mentally and never forgave Key for that.
      And as for the txts, he doesn’t have them, All bluster as usual.

  16. Stephen Doyle 16
    11 August 2017 at 12:02 pm

    For every percentage point over 35% that Labour gets, the Greens have to get 1 less than 15% to form a joint govt, excluding Winston. Not beyond the realms of possibility. Especially if Labour climbs into the high 30s,low 40s.

  17. McFlock 17
    11 August 2017 at 1:18 pm

    Heh.

    So with similar dramatic drops in the polls, it seems to me that similar predictions about the possible future of the Greens and NZ1 meet with quite dissimilar responses.

    Personally I think that both NZ1 and the Greens have a core constituency of around 10%, maybe slightly higher when the stars align. I think growth from that level is far more elastic than decline – i.e. 20% is as achievable as 5%. But that’s just my navel-gazing.

    • dukeofurl 17.1
      11 August 2017 at 1:47 pm

      Not really. When labour gets closer to 40% then Greens and NZF drop closer to 5%.

      We can see recently when labour got down to 23% then Greens and NZF were close to 15%.

      • McFlock 17.1.1
        11 August 2017 at 2:17 pm

        That assumes that nact will get a reasonably fixed slice of cake, though.

        Nact go down another 5 points, that’s natlab38:38, nz1grn10:10

        And then there’s the “didn’t answer/weren’t home” proportion, which is probably massive for phone surveys.

        If the nats have a fixed slice of cake weighing 1mil votes, then getting more peple out who are more likely to vote for someone else (which the greens excel at) in effect shrinks the nat slice as much as the lab slice. i.e. rather than 5% for greens being 5 off lab, it’s 2.5 each off lab and nat. My math might be fucked, but I think the principle is clear.

  18. savenz 18
    11 August 2017 at 2:15 pm

    NZ First could also be down due to comments about referendum on the so called ‘anti smacking’ bill. Plus Labour been clearer about immigration policy. NZ First also flip flopped and appeared to back cheap farm labour immigration visas. That would cost them. Also Shane Jones appearing in the mix, might have them down.

    I don’t think it’s just the so called Jacinda effect.

    Winston also wastes time on being against the Greens which again is not exactly getting NZ First core messages across. Even the oldies are waking up to climate change as their house floods or falls off the cliffs and the farming folks are in droughts and extreme weather.

    NZ First should be targeting National a lot more, because there is a lot of dissent there about asset sales and offshore farm sales and corruption, as well as long hospital lists, for example from conservatives who may not want to go Labour and Greens.

    • red-blooded 18.1
      11 August 2017 at 3:15 pm

      Labour has been clear about immigration issues for months. Shane Jones has been on the radar for NZ1st for weeks (confirmed as a candidate on June 30th, but rumoured for ages before that). Winston has ALWAYS wasted time railing against the Greens.

      You seem pretty determined to dismiss any positive effect the Ardern is having on Labour’s fortunes. Why?

  19. Tamati Tautuhi 19
    11 August 2017 at 3:49 pm

    NZF will be 15-20% on Election Day

  20. mary_a 20
    11 August 2017 at 3:52 pm

    A vote for Winston and NZF will be like stepping into a deep, dark sinkhole, not knowing where it’s going.

    Winston keeping on playing these silly games … ‘I know something you don’t know, but I’m not going to tell you what it is,’ … (in this instance the English texts) … is childish nonsense. He thinks he’s adding to his popularity, when in fact he’s pissing voters off! Intelligent people will say enough and look at another party to vote for.

    • greywarshark 20.1
      11 August 2017 at 4:42 pm

      Actually Winston is pissing ON voters. And you have to be drunk to find something funny in that, I should think. As a sober person getting more po-faced every day I certainly don’t retain any of my previous occasional kind thoughts about the Key-like contender for the celebrity variety show, which appears to be his idea of what the election is about.

    • Stuart Munro 20.2
      11 August 2017 at 9:33 pm

      There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man. It is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man’s fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination. It is an area which we call the Winston Zone.

  21. tsmithfield 21
    11 August 2017 at 3:56 pm

    I don’t know if NZ First will drop below 5%. However, I think there is the potential for them to drop further with the left and right wing protest votes drifting back to Labour and National if things start getting tight. Obviously, this has already happened to some extent with the left side of NZ First.

    I think NZ First’s best strategy is to declare for National. This would then give disgruntled National voters the safety to make a protest vote by voting NZ First. That strategy wouldn’t work to get Labour voters back because Labour voters seem fairly euphoric at the moment, so would be unlikely to shift.

    NZ First does have the advantage in that it can differentiate itself fairly clearly.

    On the other hand, I think the Greens could be in a bit of trouble. Firstly, there is all the public dysfunction that tends to put potential voters off. Secondly, Labour appears to be swooping in to whisk Green voters away by announcing policies designed to appeal to this base.

    The result is that it is very hard for the Greens to differentiate themselves from Labour now. I think potential voters will be asking themselves why would they vote for the Greens when they can get that and more now by voting Labour.

    • Jeremy 21.1
      11 August 2017 at 4:54 pm

      Winston isn’t going to ever declare a preference IMHO.

      He’d rather risk losing a few percentage and hope he’s still the Kingmaker after the election, then declare a preference. His negotiating power after the election will come from him presenting a credible threat of going with either Labour or National. The lack of this credible threat is why the Greens were never in coalition with HC’s Labour Government.*

      *Please don’t take this to mean that the Greens should in future declare that they will work with either party, to do this will never happen due to the 4 pillars – one of which is social justice. An environmental party that will go with either National or Labour will need to be a whole new entity.

  22. Tamati Tautuhi 22
    11 August 2017 at 4:26 pm

    NZF is an independent party with it’s own policies, it is not aligned to National or the Labour Party, obviously most people on this site still do not understand how MMP actually works ?
    http://www.nzfirst.org.nz/policies

  23. greywarshark 23
    11 August 2017 at 4:37 pm

    Tim Murphy
    Only a man could come up with a prediction of 6% for the Greens. I hope there are enough people who can see further than the craft beer. wine or spirits at the end of their hand. Needed are thoughtful women who have empathy with mothers and parents in general who are struggling, along with men who have a solid base of respect for others who are not enhanced by the chosen economic decisions of the dead hand of neo-lib government. People who reach out and hold the hand of other NZs who want to part of a thriving, happy community of workers paid enough so they have a living wage.

    That was the accepted vision of NZ some decades ago, now wilted but able to be revived and renewed with regular doses of water, if there is enough left so to do!

  24. The Pink postman 24
    11 August 2017 at 4:53 pm

    NF is a Right-Wing racist party.Talking to its members its not long before their horrible racist views become obvious and their is no doubt
    Their main object is to reduce migration and their policy regarding refugees is appalling and insulting to decent caring New Zealanders .

    • Tamati Tautuhi 24.1
      12 August 2017 at 7:11 am

      Is NF the National Front ?

    • Daniel Eyre 24.2
      12 August 2017 at 10:20 am

      Why are you mentioning the National Front for?

    • ropata 24.3
      12 August 2017 at 11:26 pm

      Silly hyperbole NZ1 is nationalist first and foremost. That does mean lower immigration and social conservatism in some attitudes but economically they are definitely to the left of the Nats

      https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/18-07-2017/what-really-makes-nz-first-tick-i-joined-the-party-and-headed-to-their-jamboree-to-find-out/

      New Zealand First has always stood for what might be termed economic nationalism — active government intervention in favour of ordinary and sometimes vulnerable Kiwis (with an emphasis on Kiwis, above all else). It’s right there in the name: New Zealand First. And you can see it in Peters’ signature implemented policy: the SuperGold Card for the elderly. Peters, after all, was originally a National MP who split with the party over the sharp right turn on economic issues it took in the early 1990s.

      Although it continues to see itself as a party of the centre, the New Zealand First on display at the conference often sounded like it had been founded by Jim Anderton when it came to economic issues. The running theme was that New Zealanders are caught in the clutches of the unscrupulous, wealthy and often foreign; in the thrall of the failed post-1984 neoliberal experiment. The ordinary working Kiwi is getting shafted – particularly in the regions – runs the message.

  25. Michael who failed Civics 25
    11 August 2017 at 5:34 pm

    Most of the comments on this thread are wishful thinking by Labour loyalists and ignore reality. Although Jacinda Ardern has rejuvenated Labour’s appearance, its substance is unchanged from Andrew Little’s day. People didn’t like (or trust) Labour then and they won’t like (or trust) it again once “Jacindamania” wears off. I understand the desire of Labour tacticians (no strategists of any note, AFAICS, in this campaign) to pump Jacinda for all they’re worth, but all it will take is a slight stumble on her part to reveal the rotten, out of date, neoliberal core of the Labour Party in 2017.

    • Daniel Eyre 25.1
      12 August 2017 at 10:29 am

      I agree. These people who get all fanciful and refuse to accept reality are always people who have never been beyond their comfort zone and are not successful in life.

      Like him or not: Winston Peters is the best politician in NZ (and before anyone takes exception to that; no that is not the same thing as being a good national leader nor a good person – politics is a filthy game) and plenty of the NZ electorate will be voting for him in the election and the chances of him not being back are slim to none. The media will continue to attack him and he will continue to show up their mediocrity.

      And no; most of those people voting for him are not especially stupid nor all that different to most Labour voters. The man is a slimy populist reactionary but he’s far from Adolf Hitler and not really all that different to most politicians. Of course these people are not objective and therefore cannot look at some of the pieces of rubbish in the Labour Party…

  26. KJT 26
    12 August 2017 at 12:08 pm

    Once people see that the only change in Labour is a pretty face votes will come back to NZF.

    A lot of NZF voters are the working class that Labour abandoned.

    They, again, hope that Labour has changed, but no one in Labour is going to restore workers rights.

    Voters will come back to Greens for the same reason.

    Labour needs to attract back the working class that vote National, because they see little difference.

  27. Tanz 27
    12 August 2017 at 9:51 pm

    Never write him off. Both of the main parties are so desperate for power that
    anything could happen, even Winston as PM. He is second favourite as PM already,
    and he always looks the part. Get ready for three more years of National, but with Winston at the helm. Greens will be locked out, many people hope.

  28. John Stone 28
    13 August 2017 at 7:01 am

    Maybe the squeeze but see TOP instead of Greens. NZ Green Brand has been damaged beyond repair. The disadvantaged need hope.