Pollwatch: Reid Research poll completed 2020-07-24

89 comments on “Pollwatch: Reid Research poll completed 2020-07-24 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Matthew Whitehead 1

   26 July 2020 at 9:32 pm

   Note on my electorate shift model: It's not intended to accurately call individual electorates. What it's supposed to do is get as close as possible to the right number of electorates, statistically, for each party, so it's possible that the electorate shifts or list calls will be slightly off, but the number of list/electorate seats should generally be reasonably accurate to within a couple of seats if it performs as expected.

   The government probably trend I show above is for the party list analysis is the result of a monte carlo simulation where I use random numbers to show a rough distribution of what the probability of various options within the margin of error actually looks like- this gives us a ballpark of various coalition options and the chance of medium parties (or former medium parties) being under/over threshold without even looking at the trend- and in context of the overall trend we can make better calls.

   The seat diagram half-pie is calculated by feeding Reid Research's vote percentages back into the official MMP calculator with my electorate shift assumptions included.
   • Peter 1.1

     27 July 2020 at 12:04 pm

     I think that the comment "It's not intended to accurately call individual electorates. What it's supposed to do is get as close as possible to the right number of electorates, statistically, for each party" is a good proviso for the Northland electorate.

     I know Matt King has been doing some desperate things which often is an indicator of need, but realistically a lot of strange things would have to happen to see Shane Jones beat him.
     • Matthew Whitehead 1.1.1

       27 July 2020 at 2:49 pm

       Yes, Northland's call is probably a direct result of me picking the Strong Transfer model from the UK, which is adjusted to prevent undercounting Liberal Democrats, over a simpler tranfer model, as the Strong Transfer Model protects some of New Zealand First's vote as a strong regional turnout above party vote lines, but doesn't do the same thing to National as noticably. I don't know if it's a reliable call or not, and I think we should wait until any electorate polling is released to feel sure on Northland. Frankly I have no intention of trying to accurately call individual electorates using any kind of party vote shift model, the idea here is to just have a more accurate basis for figuring out who'd be "in" or "out" on the party lists so you know who you get if you shift or maintain your party vote in a certain place.

       My model for electorate shift is based on one of the approaches from Electoral Calculus UK, but without the more complicated demographic regression data they use.
       • froggleblocks 1.1.1.1

         27 July 2020 at 3:40 pm

         Is there ever any electorate polling released? The parties themselves must do it for key electorates, but any public news polls?
         • Matthew Whitehead 1.1.1.1.1

           27 July 2020 at 4:35 pm

           In 2017, there was some lower-accuracy electorate polling done with 400 respondents over a very long fieldwork period. It's what led Dunne to resign.
2. Matthew Whitehead 2

   26 July 2020 at 9:40 pm

   Also worth noting from the Green List, this would return the current caucus less Gareth Hughes, who is retiring, and without his expected successor, Teanau Tuiono.
   • Chris 2.1

     28 July 2020 at 12:36 am

     What's the Greens' policy on relationships and benefits? All I can find from your link is removing disincentives to enter into a relationship, what ever that means.
3. swordfish 3

   26 July 2020 at 10:06 pm

   It’s also worth noting what ISN’T caught in this poll: Fieldwork was only open for one day after Iain Lees-Galloway’s resignation, so this may show a higher result for Labour than the upcoming Colmar Brunton/TVNZ poll

   Spot on … that was my initial thought as well (although probably 2 days rather than 1). Pollsters often reach 50% of their target in the first 2 or 3 days … so it's possible that only a tiny % of the fieldwork took place after the ILG story broke … something for pundits to bear in mind … still an extraordinary result, of course.

   House Effects suggest Colmar Brunton will be a little more National-friendly in any case … hence its later fieldwork dates (more completely encompassing the ILG fallout) may simply reinforce that pre-existing tendency further.

   … the upcoming Colmar Brunton/TVNZ poll will, given it’s still open for fieldwork right now, so we can be expecting another update within a week or two.

   Thursday 30 July 6pm … would be my guess.
4. Tricledrown 4

   27 July 2020 at 5:43 am

   The dead cat bounce didn't happen for Collins as it happened for Muller .

   Collins only popular amongst die hard National supporters.
   • Matthew Whitehead 4.1

     27 July 2020 at 1:28 pm

     I'd say Muller's initial change in tone helped National, but his personal popularity was terrible and he couldn't follow through with that change in tone.

     Collins isn't trying, which means although she's personally popular with her base, like Trump, she's also bleeding party support to Labour. She might be the only practical option now, but she’s demonstrably the wrong option for the times. Thankfully, IMO.
5. ScottGN 5

   27 July 2020 at 7:04 am

   The problem for National is, that even if the Colmar-Brunton poll is more favourable to them, as it mostly is, it will inevitably be compared to the previous CB poll which appears to have overestimated National’s support (as compared to Reid Research and Roy Morgan) at the time. So if it shows a lower party vote percentage it will get reported as a drop in support. And so the general trend gets reinforced.
   • Hanswurst 5.1

     27 July 2020 at 8:00 am

     Well, they should compare Colmar Brunton polls with each other, but the media often seem just to compare whichever polls they think will make for the best story taken together.
   • Matthew Whitehead 5.2

     27 July 2020 at 1:35 pm

     I don't think CB is "more favourable to National," and it honestly comes very close to RR. The one outlier you're looking at is when David Clark had to resign. From time to time they tend to overestimate whichever side is tending stronger at the time- we can see that in the second CB poll this year, for instance.

     In 2017, RR consistently gave higher results for National and New Zealand First, and CB to Labour. RR was closer to being correct. (RM overpolled the Greens but was largely very close to RR otherwise when their polls fell nearby each other)

     And polls don’t tend to lead public opinion in the way you’re suggesting. Coverage might, but polls not so much.
     • swordfish 5.2.1

       27 July 2020 at 3:33 pm

       I don't think CB is "more favourable to National," and it honestly comes very close to RR.

       Shortly before the June 2020 Colmar Brunton, I identified those occasions (since the 2017 Change of Govt) when CB & RR fieldwork dates largely coincided (ranging from almost perfect overlap (at best) to a week apart (at worst)).

       The differential (mean) averages (CB figures compared with RR) were:

       Lab … down 2.8

       Green … equal

       NZF … up 0.9

       Govt Bloc … down 1.9

       Nat … up 2.5

       ACT … up 0.1

       Oppo Bloc … up 2.6

       Other … down 0.8

       Suggesting Colmar Brunton is indeed a little more Nat / Oppo Bloc-friendly (certainly since June 2019).

       Certainly wasn't the case during the Key Govt … but does appear to be now (yes … there are exceptions eg Jan/Feb 2018, May 2018 / May 2020 … not an iron law … but tendency).
       • Matthew Whitehead 5.2.1.1

         27 July 2020 at 4:33 pm

         Those numbers don't even exceed the margins of error.

         How many occasions are you working on? do they overlap with events that are friendlier to the nats?
         • swordfish 5.2.1.1.1

           27 July 2020 at 5:52 pm

           .
           At the time of my analysis (shortly before May 2020 CB release) the previous 4 consecutive 'crossover' periods had the Nats higher in CB than RR … the first (Feb 2019) only slightly … but the following three = by 7 points (June 2019), 3 points (Oct 2019), 3 points (Feb 2020) respectively. (margin of error = irrelevant… just interested in consistent House Effects … which are often of a mild nature, within MoE).

           Admittedly, the May CB raises some questions … although I've argued that it was probably bordering on Rogue status.

           .

           do they overlap with events that are friendlier to the nats?

           Don't think so … although I'd be happy to see any evidence for your intriguing argument that CB occasionally overestimate whichever side is tending stronger at the time. Interesting thesis but would need to see more convincing evidence.
           .
6. Sacha 6

   27 July 2020 at 8:09 am

   Ardern at net 77.1% (+85.3% & -8.2%

   Astonishing.
   • observer 6.1

     27 July 2020 at 8:23 am

     And still misunderstood by the Nats' echo chamber.

     Even if the "rogue" underestimates National's support, only one National voter in three disapproves of the PM's performance. So let's patronise her or mock "Cindy", that'll work!
     • Sacha 6.1.1

       27 July 2020 at 8:28 am

       The bitterness of Nat backroom advisors has survived the recent leadership changes. Ego problem.
7. greywarshark 7

   27 July 2020 at 8:17 am

   It's too early, always, for me to completely follow the stats, What happened to set Labour, briefly, low and Nats to rise briefly in response? Would it have been June – what happened then? Was it one of the Covid-19 happenings?
   • observer 7.1

     27 July 2020 at 8:25 am

     "Border bungles", that CB poll was taken in the week when they dominated the news.
     • ScottGN 7.1.1

       27 July 2020 at 8:47 am

       Yeah the last CB poll was at the same time as the media frenzy around Thelma and Disease’s tiki tour from Auckland to Wellington and of course Woodhouse’s legendary Homeless Man.
8. Tricledrown 8

   27 July 2020 at 8:22 am

   National's desperation will show in Epsom .

   Pushing the National further to the right.
9. Hanswurst 9

   27 July 2020 at 8:27 am

   In terms of NZ First, one possibility that I haven't seen mentioned is that NZ First could be very well placed to benefit from the phenomenon seen in 2002, where voters jumped to possible Labour support parties, the reason according conventional wisdom being that those voters wanted to put a brake on what seemed to be a certain Labour government after the election. The interesting question is how NZ First might go about picking up that support. I'm guessing that trying to poach swinging Labour votes by playing directly to Labour's strengths in government would not be seen as a viable option, so their best (and Peters' most natural) option might very well be to attack National and Collins' credibility and record, while portraying themselves as sensible, conservative and fiscally prudent.

   Assuming that the 25 – 30% support that National retains at present isn't National's core base support, but a coalescing of the base support for Liberal / Conservative policies, then National's vote could actually slip even further in favour of NZ First, while NZ first can safely assume that, as long as they look a reasonable bet for returning to parliament, more conservative Labour voters will probably gravitate to them closer to the election if Labour's support remains high (Where else can they go? Act? Not likely). If that happens, we may actually see NZ First poll quite significantly over 5% on election night.

   Similarly, if Labour's support remains high, more of the leftish Labour voters are likely to switch to the Greens if the latter look shaky on making the 5% threshold. Now, if Labour gets somewhere just below 50%, and both the Greens and NZ First get over 5%, I would guess that Ardern would try to put together a coalition with all three parties, but I would also expect NZ First to refuse and go into opposition, because that is where they have historically been seen most success, whereas their stints in government have seen them lose support, even to the point of falling out of parliament in 2008.
   • Sacha 9.1

     27 July 2020 at 8:31 am

     Winnie would have no veto power during coalition negotiations (eg: over Green MPs being in cabinet). Interesting to see how that works out for him.

     At least his handbraking would be out in the open on the opposition benches. Would also suit Shane Jones’ capability level to be moaning about things rather than having to work to make them happen.
   • observer 9.2

     27 July 2020 at 8:51 am

     There's certainly the historical precedent of swing voters not wanting to give any party an absolute majority (Key never got one, despite very high pre-election polling). The poll last night backs this up to a degree. Numbers in link:

     https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/07/newshub-reid-research-poll-voters-want-minor-parties-in-parliament.html

     But the idea that NZF could play the role of United Future from 2002 is questionable, I think.

     Dunne had no baggage. Voters looking for a moderating/centrist option could tick UF without having to take a cold shower afterwards. Winston polarises, Dunne was an empty vessel of "common sense". And important too: Dunne held an electorate.

     Ironically, if swing voters think the Greens are too left/radical, the best way to moderate Labour is to vote Labour. Counter-intuitive, but less risky than a wasted vote for NZF.
     • Hanswurst 9.2.1

       27 July 2020 at 9:05 am

       Dunne had no baggage.

       Apart from the fourth Labour government, and having campaigned in 1996 on being the one minor party that was a sure bet to cross the 5% threshold and put a brake on either major party, then singularly failing to do so (polling under 1%), before losing ground (and all but his own seat) at the 1999 election. There were plenty of reasons not to bet on Mr. Dunne in 2002, yet people did. Besides, there is no similar spoiler candidate in the forthcoming election; parliament is somewhat less diverse in terms of the number of options with some semblance of electoral viability in 2020 than it was in 2002. It's basically NZ First or nothing if you're looking for someone who is (at least superficially) centrist.

       Counter-intuitive, but less risky than a wasted vote for NZF.

       Well, I'm speculating that a vote for NZ First will look less like a wasted vote to more conservative Labour voters if it can first poach some of National's remaining support. More importantly, though, in guessing how electoral dynamics might play out, I'm less interested in the most sensible option for voters than the most likely, and voters are not likely to opt en masse for something counter-intuitive.
       • observer 9.2.1.1

         27 July 2020 at 9:15 am

         Come on, Dunne's recognition level among the public was minimal. Listing his record tells us nothing about his perceived negatives and positives, which is what "baggage" means.

         There really is no comparison to 30 years of Winston Peters, about whom nobody in NZ lacks an opinion.
   • Matthew Whitehead 9.3

     27 July 2020 at 1:42 pm

     So, I've probably mentioned this on Twitter, (I post these there while I'm mid working on them and use them to gather any early corrections before beefing up the analysis to put them on TS) but while that's definitely how previous narrowings of the Labour vote went, we can actually see what happened in the trend here during the blip in that one CB poll: support went to National, the Greens, and ACT. This suggests that a lot of Labour's popularity right now is actually more centre-right swing voters who've moved tactically to Labour to try and make them a majority and lock out the Greens given they don't trust National very much at the moment.
     • froggleblocks 9.3.1

       27 July 2020 at 3:44 pm

       They'll be in for disappointment when Ardern brings Greens into a coalition even if Labour got an outright majority anyway.
       • Matthew Whitehead 9.3.1.1

         27 July 2020 at 4:31 pm

         That's possible, but I expect a coalition with the Greens where Labour has its own majority looks very different to one where Labour's in a minority, and even that looks different to one where the Greens are the only game in town to get their legislation passed.
10. Robert Guyton 10

    27 July 2020 at 9:56 am

    New Zealand's unofficial poet laureate Victor Billot pens topical verse every Sunday. This week: an extraordinary week for the National Party.

    Toad’s Fall; and the Rise of Crusher

    All hail! Sad tidings O countrymen and womyn!

    Or tidings of such dank complexion, we stare witless.

    In the cold grey of dawn, a dead raven

    tumbl’d earthwards from the heavens,

    claws clutching a parchment of bitter import.

    O woe! O gnashing of teeth!

    Lord Toad is fallen.

    Toad the Brief! Lord of the Bay!

    We salute your concise efforts nonetheless.

    Ere since the lopping of Simon the Unfortunate,

    it was written in the stars in bloody hand:

    from treachery, no good can be enjoined.

    Our allies scatter’d and undone:

    the Witch of the Northern Boag

    chained and raving in the House of Bedlam;

    Michael d’Outhouse, chest deep

    in the Slough of Muck, many leagues hence;

    Youngling Hamish of the Southern March

    in quest of opportunities in the private sector.

    Even Nikki, fairest elf of all, has depart’d her post

    at the shadowed gates of Sauron’s Tower.

    Lost! All is lost!

    Yet even as we stumble in the fog of defeat,

    the earth trembleth under distant hooves.

    Sound the bugles! Crash the drums!

    On her legendary winged steed Oravida

    approacheth Lady Judith the Merciless,

    flanked by her doughty lieutenants

    Friar Gerry and Seymour of Remmers.

    In these extraordinary years,

    hope is never friendless;

    and battle will be joined once more!

    In the vanguard, Baron Luxon follows,

    his half smile widening by a measure

    as doth the waxing moon;

    his loyalty pledged to whoever,

    for the time being, at least.

    Victor Billot has previously been moved to write odes for Garrick Tremain, Todd Muller, Donald Trump, Prince Andrew, David Clark, Paula Bennett and Hamish Walker.

    *Made with the support of Creative New Zealand *
    • Wensleydale 10.1

      27 July 2020 at 11:31 am

      That was some quality verse. I lolled. And that almost never happens.
    • Tiger Mountain 10.2

      27 July 2020 at 1:10 pm

      Well done again Victor! it is a LOL from me too.
    • Dennis Frank 10.3

      27 July 2020 at 4:48 pm

      Channelling Shakespeare? Mayhap even earlier? Not oft seen, nowadays, in such style, forsooth! 👻
11. novacastrian 11

    27 July 2020 at 10:29 am

    It appears many here are getting all hot'n'huffy regarding this poll which appears highly questionable at best. Even the Prime Minister appeared somewhat sceptical on the Mike Hosking interview regarding the poll results. Article in Stuff this morning basically echoes the same, indicating the poll was near statically impossible at being correct.

    I think it's a given Labour will win the election, however by a healthy, but also slender margin. This being largely based on the Jacindamania popularity factor, rather than the overall party performance, which has been genuinely underwhelming in many aspects. If it wasn't for stars like Megan Woods, the virtual Minister for Everything these days assisting the PM, then I feels things could be certainly much grimmer for Labour.

    I still maintain both the Greens and NZ First have seen their final curtain call politically, with both exiting politics this election. The wildcard here is ACT, my gut tells me they are harvesting many votes from those disenfranchised by the major parties, in particular National's. They also appear to be gaining support from those centralist's who are not very keen on Collins.

    Still, love her or hate her, Collins is a bit of a hardarse who'll make the Prime Minister work for her election victory.
    • Andre 11.1

      27 July 2020 at 10:55 am

      Keep telling yourself all that. It will numb the pain eventually.

      As for the poll being "near statically impossible at being correct", who was it that said that? Gerry Brownlee? You really think he's got enough statistics expertise for that pronouncement to be taken seriously? Or statics expertise, for that matter?
      • Wensleydale 11.1.1

        27 July 2020 at 11:32 am

        But… he was a woodwork teacher!
        • Andre 11.1.1.1

          27 July 2020 at 11:43 am

          Indeed. And all the woodwork I ever knew, I learned from my statistics teacher.
          • Poission 11.1.1.1.1

            27 July 2020 at 2:02 pm

            Measure three times, cut once?
            • Andre 11.1.1.1.1.1

              27 July 2020 at 2:17 pm

              That I'm likely to be out by 15mm or more 3 cuts in a thousand, 10mm or more roughly one in twenty, and I'm only gonna be within 5mm 68% of the time. And that I'd better learn to deal with it.
    • Matthew Whitehead 11.2

      27 July 2020 at 1:46 pm

      The poll is on-trend and I don't particularly entertain the idea it's questionable, but there should be a CB coming out soon. (I don't usually know when it's coming, but I was polled for this one) This poll likely reflects a local low point for National between the Muller resignation and Falloon, so I expect a slight bounce to CB again, but that's about timing, not about lean or reliability. CB should catch a little of the Greens’ campaign launch, all of ILG's resignation fallout, and Collins' first moves as leader.

      I’ve addressed claims the RR/Newshub poll is rogue on social media here:
      https://twitter.com/MJWhitehead/status/1287536943404744704
    • UncookedSelachimorpha 11.3

      27 July 2020 at 7:21 pm

      " I still maintain both the Greens and NZ First have seen their final curtain call politically, with both exiting politics this election. "

      Dunno about that. NZF is highly focussed (and always has been) on a single person, Winnie. The Greens involve more of a broader social movement and direction.
    • Chris 11.4

      28 July 2020 at 12:39 am

      I've heard better commentary at the pub.
12. gingercrush 12

    27 July 2020 at 10:38 am

    Polls are only as accurate as what side it goes in your favour. Trend is ultimately not going Nationals way.

    Such a poll result/trend ultimately opens up way more electorate seats potentially going Labour's way. Most North Island provincial seats will be up for play as will the Hamilton seats. Possibly even some South Island electorates.

    Also agree there isnt a party in a position to play spoiler at moment other than some National party votes going to ACT. If MMP is ever to get a government with one party having a majority. This is it's best chance. Key was in a position to do so but the vote ended up being softer than polls suggested and voters were not confident giving them a majority just as they were not confident giving Clark a majority. Jacinda is a possible exception to this. Still think there is room for some of their vote to go elsewhere but will be dependent on so many factors.
    • Matthew Whitehead 12.1

      27 July 2020 at 1:54 pm

      I may have to do an article to remind people why Majority Governments Are Bad, Mmmmkay?

      We really shouldn't want one. The reason we switched to MMP was about the unchecked power in our system for majority governments, not just about giving smaller parties a fair go.
      • Just Is 12.1.1

        27 July 2020 at 3:36 pm

        You missed the real reason why NZ changed to MMP, it was simply that the major parties, National and Labour could no longer achieve a majority, the last 2 National terms under Muldoon governed with a minority, one of those terms they only had 42% of the vote but won all of the seats (gerrymandering).

        MMP was introduced to return democracy back to politics, the newly elected Govt had to have a minimum of 50.1% of votes to take power.
        • DS 12.1.1.1

          27 July 2020 at 3:59 pm

          MMP was about punishing the political classes for 1975-1993.
          • DS 12.1.1.1.1

            27 July 2020 at 4:11 pm

            Seriously. The Nats in 1990 had an overwhelming mandate (to stop the Revolution…). The problem wasn't that the Government was undemocratic, but rather that it was abusing its unbridled power.
            • Matthew Whitehead 12.1.1.1.1.1

              27 July 2020 at 4:29 pm

              The problem was that it was both, if you want to view those as different. (I think abuse of power is fundamentally undemocratic, myself, but you possibly mean "unproportional" when you say "undemocratic?")

              I also disagree with the idea that the Nats had a mandate for policies like Ruthanasia. A mandate isn't just about how strongly you're supported, it's about which ideas you campaigned on to gain that support and whether you have enough support for the ideas to make it reasonable to pass them individually in government.
              • swordfish …

                27 July 2020 at 6:05 pm

                I also disagree with the idea that the Nats had a mandate for policies like Ruthanasia. A mandate isn't just about how strongly you're supported, it's about which ideas you campaigned on to gain that support

                Isn't that precisely what DS is arguing ? … that the Nats had an overwhelming mandate to stop the Revolution in 1990 (as in the Rogernomics Revolution) … but subsequently betrayed that mandate on a massive scale.
        • Matthew Whitehead 12.1.1.2

          27 July 2020 at 4:25 pm

          MMP governments haven't always commanded a majority of votes either, (remember, the discarded party vote, electorate winners/minor parties, and overhang seats can all add up to a fair margin for a majority in parliament to be different than a majority of the popular vote) so it's not a particularly salient criticism. FPP elections were deeply disproportionate for the major parties, sure, but that's a different thing than not having >50% of voters onside.
13. Robert Guyton 13

    27 July 2020 at 10:40 am

    "Our last poll was the death knell for Simon Bridges – it the reason he was rolled. This poll is far worse for National and Judith Collins."

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/07/newshub-reid-research-poll-the-destruction-of-national-under-judith-collins-as-party-sinks-to-25-percent.html?
14. ScottGN 14

    27 July 2020 at 10:48 am

    Tova says that when she first told Collins the poll numbers the Nat Leader accepted they were accurate. Quite a different take to the party’s response when the numbers were made public.

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/07/nz-election-2020-why-labour-s-polling-is-at-a-record-high-according-to-jacinda-ardern.html
    • Peter 14.1

      27 July 2020 at 12:01 pm

      That sort of suggests that Judith Collins in the comments I've heard her make about the results was being dishonest. She wouldn't be, would she?
15. Sacha 15

    27 July 2020 at 12:19 pm

    Those internal Nat numbers? https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/122253298/nationals-polling-chooks-come-home-to-roost

    It is understood that the National Party's internal polling has National more than 10 points higher, and Labour’s more than 10 points lower. Even if that figure is accurate, it still puts Labour around 50 per cent of the vote and puts the Collins leadership at a furniture-saving 35 per cent.

    It is saying something that the Nats are clinging onto a scenario that has Ardern Labour still nudging around 50 per cent of the realised vote, once wasted vote is stripped away.
    • Matthew Whitehead 15.1

      27 July 2020 at 1:55 pm

      I don't credit polls that aren't released publicly. Unless curia wants to release a selection of its most recent polls- let's say at least the most recent three- anything it chooses to release or leak is cherry-picking and not worth discussion.
16. Chris T 16

    27 July 2020 at 12:34 pm

    Pretty funny ACT being ahead of Winston and him looking like brown bread
    • Matthew Whitehead 16.1

      27 July 2020 at 1:56 pm

      Even more "funny" is that even with National absolutely imploding ACT can't manage more than 6 MPs in polling. :S
17. nzsage 17

    27 July 2020 at 2:00 pm

    Seems like Hosking has his head in the sand:

    "Never before have polls been less real, less relevant, or less accurate"

    Rarely read his stuff but was intrigued to see his spin on it given his darlings are in the poo.
    • Incognito 17.1

      27 July 2020 at 2:04 pm

      I thought Mike was having a rare moment of introspection and self-reflection.
      • nzsage 17.1.1

        27 July 2020 at 2:21 pm

        Only when he sticks his head up his a#$@.
        • I Feel Love 17.1.1.1

          27 July 2020 at 2:52 pm

          Ha! NZsage … it does make you wonder what NZ Hosking, Brownlee etc are looking at, the "present lot" may have flaws, but I can't see how or why the "other bunch" are better, I just see sniping, hyperbole, conspiracy & anger.
        • Matthew Whitehead 17.1.1.2

          27 July 2020 at 2:53 pm

          I really don't think that sort of comment is necessary. Hoskings is enough of a joke without resorting to that kind of more explicit anatomical humour.
18. Dennis Frank 18

    27 July 2020 at 3:00 pm

    Richard Harman's reaction to the poll here (and I cite his point about tactical voting by Natrats deserting the sinking ship): https://www.politik.co.nz/2020/07/27/nationals-polling-points-to-wrangle-over-list/

    The Newshub July poll in 2017 showed NZFirst on 13 per cent; they slumped to 7.2 per cent on election, much of their vote appearing to go to Labour. But that does raise a question. And it is a question which worries the party’s campaign strategists.

    If the public polls show the party cannot win (which last nights does) then might that provoke a further movement out of National to NZ First to “keep Labour honest” or to prevent the Greens from being part of the next Government. That is now the danger for National; that voters might write them off and start searching around for tactical votes to prevent Labour from governing alone.

    Tactical voting might also enhance both the ACT and Green votes. If that happens, National will worry that they could see a repeat of 2002 when they won only 20.93 per cent of the vote.
    • Matthew Whitehead 18.1

      27 July 2020 at 3:40 pm

      So, when Labour first polled above 50%, I made the same argument and assumed we were on track for an imminent narrowing below 50%. At a record 60% and with the trend strongly above 50%, this is actually something completely new and unprecedented in NZ polling. Every rise above 50% before has been a one-poll blip, and we've never had a period where polling un-narrows back well above 50% again. I'm very hopeful that things will narrow before the election, but I don't take that for granted, and I don't buy the idea that all three major pollsters have it wrong, and that the one CB poll where Labour were being absolutely bollocked in the media is somehow a more correct and true interpretation of what's going on. Any stable polling above 48% is majority government territory given typical discarded party vote levels.

      Farrar's internals might have been accurate under Key and English- I say might. But that's no reason to trust them now when the methodologies to keep polling accurate have drastically changed and require internet panels for the best results, and that's also no reason to trust his figures when he says he's got National closer to 30%: unless he releases the full party vote report for several polls in a row, it's absolute hearsay and potentially cherry-picking.

      I would say that we're already in Tactical Vote territory, and what we're actually getting is centre-right swing voters tactically changing intention to vote for Labour, because they don't want a left-wing government moderated by a more left-wing coalition partner. They want an unstable majority government that overreaches and doesn't have a strong Green Party helping them stabilize.
      • observer 18.1.1

        27 July 2020 at 3:52 pm

        Obviously centre-right tactical voters can't stop people voting Green, so they can't prevent a Lab-Green government, only the relative strength of the parties in it.

        I don't expect Labour to govern alone anyway, but if they had to, I don't see "unstable majority government" as the outcome. Ardern/Robertson are in charge, and they are instinctively "stable" and risk-averse, and I wouldn't see them changing radically. That's about character more than numbers.

        If we did have a majority Ardern government, it would disappoint those who want a steamroller , a Rogernomics in reverse, and in any case it would almost certainly not hold an absolute majority for more than one term. MMP's constraints are about the next election as much as the gov't of the day.
        • observer 18.1.1.1

          27 July 2020 at 3:56 pm

          I guess my point is that we can only choose from the limited menu available. The absence of potential "moderating" partners is a deeper problem, relating to thresholds and the various failings of minor parties.

          In theory, having no majority gov't is better. In practice, majority government is a lesser problem than relying on Shane Jones not to be a jerk.
          • Matthew Whitehead 18.1.1.1.1

            27 July 2020 at 4:21 pm

            I'm happy to get rid of New Zealand First, don't get me wrong. But I think the cancer of majority government and the cancer of New Zealand First are roughly equal enemies.
        • UncookedSelachimorpha 18.1.1.2

          27 July 2020 at 7:27 pm

          " Rogernomics in reverse "

          I'd vote for that!
      • swordfish 18.1.2

        27 July 2020 at 4:23 pm

        At a record 60% and with the trend strongly above 50%, this is actually something completely new and unprecedented in NZ polling. Every rise above 50% before has been a one-poll blip

        Do What ?

        National support fluctuated between 50-60% for 20 consecutive TV3 Reid Research polls between Feb 2009- Nov 2011 (without doing the calculations … it looks from sight to have averaged in mid-50s throughout that long sustained period).

        Over the same broad timeline, the Nats ranged from 53-57% in the Colmar Brunton (Feb 2009-April 2010) (8 consecutive CB Polls), then fell to late 40s, then back gently fluctuating between 50-56% (Sep 2010-Nov 2011) (12 consecutive polls).
        • Matthew Whitehead 18.1.2.1

          27 July 2020 at 4:44 pm

          Let's see… you're definitely right about polling over 50% consistently, so I retract and concede, (I've been monitoring closely since about 2014 so that's what I usually talk about when I do it from memory, whoops!) but I would say that Labour being this high is definitely new, and that anyone polling over 60% this close to an election is absolutely unprecedented. The closest is National polling 57.4% about one and a half months out in that same contest.

          If we call that a 2.5% difference from 2011, (It’s more like 3.5%, but let’s allow some room for error) and bring that forward to National’s election result expecting similar narrowing, we’d get Labour at 49.8% of the vote. That’s a majority at 62 seats, even if we give all the lost votes to ACT. (results from hypothetical)
          • Matthew Whitehead 18.1.2.1.1

            27 July 2020 at 5:03 pm

            The "safety point" of return to minority government for me is if Labour falls below 48%, (see hypothetical here, where Labour loses 2% extra to the Greens and just barely needs them or New Zealand First) but at this stage I'm seriously considering that voters are heading in a different direction so far. 46% as about the safety point at which NZ First are not a viable coalition partner if we assume their vote doesn't recover above 2% but they win Northland. (changing up the allocations between parties sometimes gives them an extra MP at 2% given how close they are to the breakpoint)
      • xanthe 18.1.3

        27 July 2020 at 5:01 pm

        "They want an unstable majority government that overreaches and doesn't have a strong Green Party helping them stabilize."

        eeekkk from what planet did you just arrive?
        • Matthew Whitehead 18.1.3.1

          27 July 2020 at 5:04 pm

          Planet "I remember the history of Rogernomics and Ruthanasia and do not consider those governments 'stable.'" Then again for me stability is about stability for the country not for the government.
          • xanthe 18.1.3.1.1

            27 July 2020 at 10:21 pm

            "I remember the history of Rogernomics and Ruthanasia and do not consider those governments 'stable.'"

            ahh thats a fair point re labour!

            The greens however are not in any sense stable and should not be allowed anywhere near any levers. As labour strategists are well aware
19. Ken 19

    27 July 2020 at 3:26 pm

    I don't buy the line that they're pushing……"Labour is a poorly performing government with only Jacinda to keep them afloat".

    Performance is a relative thing, and it's beyond doubt that National couldn't run a cake stall properly – let alone a government.

    So by comparison, the Government is performing like a well maintained Ferrari, while the opposition is performing like an old wreck rusting away in a paddock.
    • Just Is 19.1

      27 July 2020 at 3:44 pm

      Ken

      That's pretty much on the money, the ones criticizing couldn't achieve same performance if they copied everything.
    • Matthew Whitehead 19.2

      27 July 2020 at 4:02 pm

      Labour is IMO a well-performing government overall, but there's a big gap between its top-5 or so performing Ministers (Woods, Hipkins, Little, Parker, and Faafoi are who I'm thinking of- there might be more but they might be in positions where my distaste for Labour's policies in that area are perhaps clouding my judgement) and the tier of junior ministers working their way up, or, in at least one case, bungling their way through, and a lot of Ministers who have probably hit their capability ceiling in their current roles, at least so long as there's not a smarter place to reassign them to. Were the opposition not completely bereft of the senior talent they think Labour doesn't have enough of, this might be an effective criticism.

      I should also point out that at least 2 of the best performers are also in the Green Party, (if not all three Ministers and the under-secretary) and that if we want a Ferrari, we should probably deliver a minority result to Labour, and a strong 10%+ Green result so we can get 4+ Green ministers there and some new, highly effective backbenchers from both parties online to replace the ones we're promoting to be junior ministers in coalition. That will give some breathing room to Labour's heavy lifters and hopefully give them an excuse to weed out the Willie Jacksons of their caucus from ministries and bring in some real junior heavyweights as associates, specialized ministers or under-secretaries, like Dr Ayesha Varrell, Louisa Wall, Deborah Russel, Kiri Allan, Jan Logie, Marama Davidson, Chlöe Swarbrick, and so on.

      But National running this line is just an own goal in a party where, outside the leadership, the only experience they have left after 2020 Simon Bridges and maybe Nick Smith, if they get enough list seats. What are they gonna do, give all the portfolios to Bridges and Brownlee? At the moment they're struggling to even get their Finance Spokesperson elected while still bringing in a potential coalition partner.
      • Anne 19.2.1

        27 July 2020 at 10:49 pm

        I think you will find Deborah Russell is up for a hefty portfolio next term. She is extremely capable and smart – in fact I would place her alongside Megan Woods when it comes to ability.
20. DS 20

    27 July 2020 at 3:57 pm

    Obvious point: if 61%-25% is any where near accurate (and I am severely sceptical), the model's predictions of electorates break down. Seriously, at that result? National winds up with two electorates south of Taranaki-King Country (Southland and Selwyn), and both are marginal.

    In short, there won't be an overhang, because National won't be winning 32 electorates if they lose the party vote by 36%. They'll be winning a dozen, most of which would be in Auckland.
    • Matthew Whitehead 20.1

      27 July 2020 at 4:14 pm

      2002, National's worst-ever performance, about 4% worse than this, had them retain 21 electorates. The model is somewhat friendly to National in terms of electorate wins because it's an electorate shift model, which relies on 2017 data when they run a hugely successful electorate campaign well out of line with their party vote. (note that there were only 69 electorates at the time, and that 3 were won by minor parties, as opposed to 72 and a projected 2 for 2020. In 1999, National won 22/67 electorates, with 4 going to minor parties, and won 30% of the vote, but in 2005, they also won about 30%, and won 31/69 electorates with 7 going to minors. Over time, National has won more of the electorate seats without winning more of the Party Vote, so if I'm being overly friendly to them, I'm reasonably confident it's not by much)

      Some of this is also that I don’t associate a strong winning vote with getting additional votes on their own- the transition model requires some other party to lose those votes first, and despite looking like a wipeout due to how weak ACT is, this isn’t actually the weakest National’s ever been yet.
      • DS 20.1.1

        27 July 2020 at 5:27 pm

        Number of electorates won isn't a function of National voteshare. It's a function of National voteshare relative to Labour voteshare.

        National was 20% behind in 2002, when it won 21 electorates. Here, it's 36% behind. Hence it being knocked down to a dozen. Or worse… there are some electorates where Labour simply can't gain an extra 30% due to saturation… which means the biggest swings have to be in safe Nat seats.
21. Austringer 21

    27 July 2020 at 6:09 pm

    Early days, the Nats will claw back minimal 10% possible and probable more, so no champagne yet, or Preseco, for the less affluent. Beer for us most, casual//, minimum hour and waged to celebrate with, minding with care the cost of power the rent and food costs. So on yer own, no one to pass the buck, or a party necessity to rule, with seeing, it will be best served N.Z. First, the partner to ensure your third term, minding you get this second coming.

    Am old school socialist, in this new corporate exploit of our world I do understand being a serious admire of Engels, that not always compromise delivers the best care.
22. Paul 22

    27 July 2020 at 6:23 pm

    I'm interested. Where are the cut off lines if National score 30%, 35%, 40%?
23. Brian Tregaskin 23

    27 July 2020 at 7:34 pm

    LOL Newstalk ZB must be worried —I heard an interview with the head of UMR polling on drive time a few minutes before 6pm on my way home from work –and lol they cut it out and replaced it with ads before 6pm. Whats up? Im guessing they don't want people to replay the interview because UMR head says he trusts the TV3 Poll Reid Research poll as a fairly accurate snapshot give or take 5% each way.

    https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-demand/week-on-demand/
24. Brian Tregaskin 24

    27 July 2020 at 8:48 pm

    For whats its worth-kiwis-trust-labour-more-than-national-to-run-the-economy

    https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2020/07/newshub-reid-research-poll-kiwis-trust-labour-more-than-national-to-run-the-economy.html

    look at the poll trend June 7 2002 50 days before Election on 27 July 2002
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2002_New_Zealand_general_election
    we afre 54 days out to 2020 election
25. Brian Tregaskin 25

    28 July 2020 at 9:57 am

    Newstalk ZB are running scared -see my comment about deleting interviews and replacing with ads two above .

    Bingo what do we have here

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12351394

    COMMENT:

    Was it a rogue poll?

    Without another time-exact poll to compare it to, it's hard to know for sure, but the available facts suggest it is rogue.
26. Brian Tregaskin 26

    28 July 2020 at 5:43 pm

    Credit to Newstalk ZB the missing interview is back

    https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/heather-du-plessis-allan-drive/audio/stephen-mills-latest-poll-reflects-nationals-recent-issues/

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS