Roy Morgan August; Nat’s Down 7%

Written By: - Date published: 7:50 pm, August 29th, 2016 - 268 comments
Categories: Andrew Little, election 2017, greens, james shaw, labour, Metiria Turei, national, nz first, polls, uncategorized - Tags: ,

The latest Roy Morgan is out. The National Party have a dropped a massive 7%, though to be fair that probably just reflects the folks at RM tweaking their methodology so they don’t get laughed at again.

Labour’s support stays at 25.5% (unchanged), Greens 14.5% (up 3%) and NZ First 9.5% (up 2.5%). If Andrew Little can stitch up a coalition deal with Winston, they’ll have a comfortable majority in the next parliament.

This poll continues the overall trend of the three opposition parties being in touching distance of a win (if they cooperate) and National not having enough oomph to get over the line without help from their pet poodles. They’ll be desperate now to make sure that the Maori Party and Peter Dunne make it back.

However, with the Labour/Green understanding in place, it’s likely that Labour will win all the maori seats, and Ohariu, leaving National 4-6 seats shy of a win.

Or a Winnie.

268 comments on “Roy Morgan August; Nat’s Down 7%”

  1. James 1

    And if he cannot – labour will be heading to another historic loss.

  2. James 2

    When labour poll at 25% little cannot be happy.

    Hoe long till the greens are the main opposition party ?

    • BM 2.1

      Little doesn’t care, while the union is paying the bills he’s completely safe.
      He will end up PM of NZ one day, could be 2020, could be 2023, could be 2026, could be 2029, but he’ll get there at some point.

      • Comrades, please ignore BM’s latest brainfart. God only knows what he’s talking about and not even God cares.

        • AmaKiwi 2.1.1.1

          Stephanie Rodgers

          I have a filter that blocks out any comments from BM.

        • Tups 2.1.1.2

          Brain fart? The only brainfart is Little will be gone after the next election.

          This heading explains why:

          ‘Roy Morgan August; Nat’s Down 7%”.

          All bluster and spin. The reality is National, for a third term government, is doing well. Especially when you consider all the controversy they have endured. Housing for example.

          • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.2.1

            All bluster and spin. The reality is National, for a third term government, is doing well. Especially when you consider all the controversy they have endured. Housing for example.

            Oh, I agree with you National are doing well all things considered. If you compare them to Labour in their third term, Labour was polling up to 10% less than National in term 3.

            The problem is that National is almost certainly not doing well enough to get a third term on its own; it MUST find a new MMP partner.

            I have a feeling that the entire election may in fact hinge on how many Maori seats Labour can win (i.e. on eliminating the Maori Party from Parliament).

            • Labour_voter 2.1.1.2.1.1

              Dear CV – You assume that Winnie will agree to a Labour-Green-NZ First government. How good is that assumption?

              • Colonial Viper

                I think it’s 60:40 leaning towards Labour. It’s certainly not a done deal.

                I think when it comes down to the negotiating, that National will be able and willing to give Winnie more than Labour.

                So even though Winston does not care one whit for John Key, he will look out for NZ First and his legislative/regulatory legacy above all else.

                • Chuck

                  “So even though Winston does not care one whit for John Key, he will look out for NZ First and his legislative/regulatory legacy above all else.”

                  You need to also add in that Winston will want to kept Northland…he does not want to upset the conservative vote which was almost double of the combined Lab/Gr party vote in 2014.

                  • Winston won’t announce his decision until after the election. Therefore, it won’t directly impact on him winning Northland. Though I’m sure the Nats will try to smear him by association, as they did with Labour and Kim Dotcom.

                  • DS

                    Except that Winston can’t win Northland without the support of Labour and Green voters.

      • Scott 2.1.2

        I don’t know that is true James. The way things are going when there is a change of government it may well be the Greens that provide the PM.

        • Colonial Viper 2.1.2.1

          Little didn’t even trust the Greens to sit on the intelligence security subcommittee.

      • Red Hand 2.1.3

        Yes, and unlike John Key it will be a deserved Prime Ministership and not a shoo-in courtesy of moneyed girls and boys.

    • Bearded Git 2.2

      My Roy Morgan 5-poll rolling average says:

      Lab/Gr/NZF 49.8
      Nats 46.0

      Lab/Gr/NZF 49.8
      Nats/Act/MP 48.3

      Key is gone if the Nats are on 45%

      • AmaKiwi 2.2.1

        A minimum winning coalition is 51%. It is the minimum number of MPs required to control parliament and form a government.

        Behavioral political scientists are clear. Irrespective of what you or I would like, this is how coalitions usually form.

        On current polling NZ First is in the driver’s seat, as Winston knows.

        Personal note: I am proud I assisted the author of this theory and the branch of political science he pioneered. At the time I had no idea how significant this work would become.

        • Colonial Viper 2.2.1.1

          Well done on your contribution to political science 🙂

          Although given wasted votes in the NZ MMP system, 49% of the vote is usually enough to secure a bare 1 or 2 seat Parliamentary majority. Does that count?

          • AmaKiwi 2.2.1.1.1

            CV, I don’t know.

            If you were forming a government, how many MPs above 51% would you want to allow for Northland upsets, minor party defections, etc.? National is sailing very close to the wind right now.

            On the other hand, a promise of a million dollars for one’s next campaign could keep someone in line. Or perhaps the threat of a GCSB, SIS, IRD investigation?

            The carrot or the stick?

            • Colonial Viper 2.2.1.1.1.1

              If Labour hadn’t deliberately destroyed Mana, both Hone and Laila would be in Parliament now, giving the Left block +1 MPs, instead of that middle of the road wet fish Kelvin Davis. John Key would have a barely governable Parliament.

              But that’s the political brilliance of the NZ Labour Party for you.

              As you know with these bastards they usually use a persuasive mix of carrot AND stick. They go for the forced regime change option usually only for the incorrugible or the incorruptible.

              • Leftie

                “If Labour hadn’t deliberately destroyed Mana, both Hone and Laila would be in Parliament now”
                No they wouldn’t. Not with Dotcom involved. Even Hone Harawira and Willy Jackson admit that.

                • Colonial Viper

                  If Hone had won his seat Mana’s party vote in 2014 was still enough to get Laila in.

                  Without Dotcom they would have got a 3rd MP in.

                  • Chris

                    And in Waiariki Labour’s strategic brilliance handed Key and his mates the Maori Party with Sykes and Waititi getting 1600 more votes than Flavell. Flavell’s win saved the Maori Party. Together with Te Tai Tokerau was a double whammy. Go Labour!

              • Stuart Munro

                I used to agree about Kelvin – and I’m still unhappy that he seems to be an either/or with Hone – but he’s been doing some actual work on prisons that really needs doing. I don’t think we can quite lump him in with notorious examples of deadwood like Stan Rodger.

            • Matthew Whitehead 2.2.1.1.1.2

              The real difficulty here is relying on NZ First for a win. Labour and the Greens need to be within striking distance of a majority, able to flex between NZ First and the Maori Party (if they get in) or United Future in order to get policies through so that Winston’s little gang don’t become critical and hamstring the Government.

              If a new Government starts out relying on Winston, it’s incredibly unlikely they’ll be able to break free of him. There are examples of coalition governments cannibalising minor parties, but the difficulty is that this usually reduces the votes for the coalition as a whole, so you’d want support that’s significantly over 50% of the voting electorate between the coalition partners for that.

              • Colonial Viper

                Labour and the Greens need to be within striking distance of a majority, able to flex between NZ First and the Maori Party (if they get in) or United Future in order to get policies through

                To me that is a combined LAB/GR vote of 45%, or 46%.

                If they come in at only only 42% or 43% then LAB/GR will be completely at Winston’s whims.

        • Bearded Git 2.2.1.2

          @Amakiwi

          National/Act/MP/UF won in 2014 with a total of 49.27% between the 4 of them.

          • AmaKiwi 2.2.1.2.1

            @Bearded Git

            50% + 1 of the seats in parliament are what form a government, NOT % of the popular vote.

            • AmaKiwi 2.2.1.2.1.1

              My description of the theory of minimum winning coalitions was a tiny thumbnail of a considerable body of theory. Another essential element is: “Politics is a zero sum game. The winners win what the losers lose.” (Like mates having a night of poker.)

              Therefore in order to form a coalition each party must give something up in order to gain goodies to pay off its own supporters. Parties with similar supporters can do this at little expense. On the other hand Act can’t surrender charter schools and Labour can’t please their teachers unions by allowing charter schools to continue. The cost to either side becomes too great for an agreement to be reached.

              So it’s not purely a matter of counting seats in parliament. You have to know what price each party has to pay to be part of the winning coalition. And Winston plays it smart by keeping his demands ambiguous.

              • Bearded Git

                Winston hates Key-he tried to destroy Winston and NZF in 2008. QED.

                • alwyn

                  Winston doesn’t really play that way. When it is in his interests he develops an incredibly thick skin.
                  Look what happened to him in the early 90s. In 1991 Bolger sacked him from the Cabinet. Then in 1992 the National party in Tauranga were told that they could not select Winston, then a sitting National member, as their candidate in the 1993 election. Winston quit and then started New Zealand First and won the by-election. If there was anyone he had reason to hate it was Bolger. If there was anyone who tried to destroy him it was Bolger After the 1996 election however he supported National, and Bolger as PM, in return for which he was made deputy-PM and Treasurer. The past was another country.
                  Do you really think he would choose to be third string with Labour and the Greens or second string with National? Who else will give him a knighthood and a term in London as High Commissioner to round out his career?

                  • Leftie

                    Paul has put up a link to the Waatea 5th estate interview with Andrew Little and Winston Peters on Open Mike. Watch and listen. Winston Peters won’t be supporting the Nats or anyone who supports them.

                    • alwyn

                      Oh dear. 30 minutes of my life wasted.
                      By the 15 minute mark of that interview Winston was dribbling uncontrollably.
                      I am still no better informed. Winston did go on about what he will campaign on. He would not however say who he would, or would not support between National and Labour. He merely said there is a long way to go and people will say new things.
                      I think you are dreaming if you think that an interview like this can be interpreted as saying that he won’t go with National. Do you remember 1996? Every lefty I knew was absolutely convinced that Winston would only go with Labour. Didn’t happen did it? Winston went with the people who would offer him the most.

                    • Chuck

                      Leftie you do make me giggle at times…but hey you should remind Winston that he has made a promise (according to Leftie) that NZF will not entertain being part of a National lead Government.

                      I am sure that would do wonders for his chances to retain Northland!

                      Some free advice Leftie…Winston is the master of deception.

                • Leftie

                  True that Bearded Git.

  3. Muttonbird 3

    The RM article says it all. They are in the pocket of the National Party.

    • James 3.1

      Yeah – Dont like the commentary – so therefore they must be on the take from National. You make me laugh.

      Couldnt be any other reasons for Labours polling – like people dont like them / their policies / little ?

      • Muttonbird 3.1.1

        Not at all. They seem to want to make editorial conclusions as a (very) simple polling company.

        Not sure they are fit to comment on their own results to be fair.

        • James 3.1.1.1

          That may be the case – but it dosnt make your comment right.

          • Muttonbird 3.1.1.1.1

            Comprehension and analysis is not your strong point. I get that, but the RM release clearly softens the blow for the government. It’s not hard to see it.

  4. Lanthanide 4

    Heh, still going with the ridiculous line that their previous poll wasn’t an outlier, and that the public really loved that $1B infrastructure announcement… Which has completely sunk without a trace and the media haven’t mentioned it since it was announced – probably because Len Brown put it into perspective by saying just a single stormwater pipeline in Auckland is going to cost the council $950M.

    Also their commentary mentions the olympics, and says we won 4 gold medals, slightly fewer than London 2012.

    But what it fails to mention is that it was our biggest ever medal haul, and that the medals came from sports we haven’t won in before. So that goes to show how much effort they actually put into their analysis.

    • weka 4.1

      Do they poll on why people would vote as they say, or do they make up their interpretation?

      • Lanthanide 4.1.1

        I was polled by Roy Morgan at the start of 2015. If that is anything to go by, they make it up.

        RM was lucky the government had made that announcement, because without it, it would have been plain to everyone that a 10% bounce for no reason was a clear outlier.

      • It appears to just be one question, weka:

        Electors were asked: “If a New Zealand Election were held today which party would receive your party vote?” This latest New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll on voting intention was conducted by telephone – both landline and mobile telephone, with a NZ wide cross-section of 845 electors in August 2016. Of all electors surveyed 6% (down 1.5%) didn’t name a party.

        I understand the Nat and Labour polling does much more in depth questioning, with follow ups about preferences, policies etc.

        • Lanthanide 4.1.2.1

          Also note that the figure they call “government confidence rating” actually comes from the question:
          “Do you think New Zealand is generally heading in the right direction, or the wrong direction?”

          Ie, they aren’t asking about people’s confidence in the government, they’re asking whether people think the country is heading in a particular direction (whatever THAT means), and then presenting it as “government confidence rating”.

          They should ask “How confident are you that the government is making the right decisions for New Zealand?”. I suspect that with National being so out of touch on the housing issue (a recent poll showing 60% of people would like to see house prices drop), that they’d get a much lower rating if the question were phrased that way.

  5. Realist 5

    Once again we will see the Left work itself into a lather as it contemplates any scenario that could see it win the Treasury Benches. This phenomenon has been witnessed for the last 3 election cycles and no doubt will continue…..

    • Leftie 5.1

      Did the right work itself into a lather when it sat in opposition for 9 years? It’s not a phenomenon, it’s politics.

      • Henry Filth 5.1.1

        It’s politics sure, but it’s also cyclical.

        As a rule, three in a row, time to go ( for National at least – Labour is a little more problematic)

        1960 National – 4 terms
        1972 Labour – 1 term
        1975 National – 3 terms
        1984 Labour – 2 terms
        1990 National – 3 terms
        1999 Labour – 3 terms
        2008 National – 3 terms
        2017 ???

        I have a sneaking feeling that votes FOR the opposition are as important as votes AGAINST the government.

        • James 5.1.1.1

          So you are relying on the “it’s our turn” rule.

        • Graeme 5.1.1.2

          Yeah, it’s generally that governments are voted out, rather than voted in. The killer being the number of party faithful that don’t bother voting.

        • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.3

          The waiting for the tide to turn against National strategy no longer works because while people are pretty sick of National, they no longer see Labour as a true alternative party of government.

          Hence National’s support can collapse in the latest RM – and Labour get zero of the 7% drop.

        • Leftie 5.1.1.4

          You cannot ignore the years prior to 1960 Henry Filth. The first Labour government was in power for 14 years, (over 4 terms). And both Labour and National have equally had 5 governments in power. John key leads the 5th National government. And yes, agree with you that 3 terms is max, (save for 2 exceptions), is the general rule.

  6. sweety 6

    This is the end of Keys (again)

  7. James 7

    Here is something funny.

    In the related post – there was this one from 2008 – http://thestandard.org.nz/roy-morgan-poll-4/

    again with National down 7% points (to 40.5%) and labour up to a massive 37.5.

    I doubt labour will hot numbers like that again for many many years. And we all know how that election ended.

    I dont think Key will be too worried with these numbers.

    • Muttonbird 7.1

      I think he is plenty worried. Hence the personal apology to Asians for NZ crime and the very clear statement they will react to homelessness as and when the media put pressure on them.

    • Anne 7.2

      I dont think Key will be too worried with these numbers.

      You reckon? Then why is he taking time out from his oh so busy schedule to write to Chinese potential voters and promise them he will look after them and keep them safe?

    • AmaKiwi 7.3

      @ James

      That poll was October 2008, as global share markets were taking a nosedive into the abyss we now call the global financial crisis. I was canvassing. People demanded change. Any change.

      A similar crash before the next election would bury National, as it buried Labour, the Republicans (Obama won), and nearly every other government that had to face the voters during the GFC.

      You’re so positive, AmaKiwi. If we want a Labour/Green landslide, we should hope for another global financial crisis!

      • alwyn 7.3.1

        “That poll was October 2008”
        That is certainly true. However if you look at the Roy Morgan poll results for the one nearest to this time in the last term, ie we look at late August 2013, we discover that National were on 41.5% and Labour were on 34%
        So, since then Labour have dropped by 8.5% and National have risen by 4.5%.
        Labour must be sweating.

        • Leftie 7.3.1.1

          Why? If you believe the polls which you obviously do Alwyn, then you will see National is actually trending downwards. The ones on the back foot are the Nats, and John Key knows it.

          • alwyn 7.3.1.1.1

            Looking at the Roy Morgan numbers the things I see are that both Labour and National have been going down a bit, with Labour going down a bit faster. The happy days of 30+% when Shearer was leader are long in the past.
            The only party going up is New Zealand First.

            • Leftie 7.3.1.1.1.1

              Why just RM? look at all the others. And Shearer belongs in the National party imo. Cunliffe had better numbers than him. But look what happened. Helen Clark was polling extremely low (2%) prior to becoming PM.

              • alwyn

                “Cunliffe had better numbers than him”
                Not according to Roy Morgan.
                Look at the graph of long term intentions.
                With Shearer as leader the Labour Party percentage was on a slow but steady rise throughout Shearer’s reign.
                The percentage did rise a bit when there was no leader but from the time Cunliffe got the job the Labour percentage steadily fell. It kept on going down right through to the election and hasn’t really recovered.
                The more people saw of Cunliffe the less they liked him.

  8. Takere 8

    So with the RM Poll over-hyped again. Could mean; “if” a coalition of these party’s happens; Lab/Green/NZ First=Nat’s & Maori Party & Dunne Gone Burger/

  9. James 9

    I dunno – but for whatever reason its smarter than the Labours “Chinese sounding surnames” debacle – So I guess hes just getting with the job with the eye on the prize.

    • Muttonbird 9.1

      I thought it was very smart and Phil Twyford’s continued recognition of performance confirms that.

      He analysed data which the government refused to do and successfully threw the Auckland housing crisis into mainstream conversation.

      Twyford is still seen as the leading spokesperson for young and low income families in Auckland.

    • Gabby 9.2

      I dunno – his I’ll see you right promises don’t always pan out too good.

  10. The Real Matthew 10

    Just for the benefit of those who haven’t yet worked it out (which seems to be a few of you) Winston will hold the balance of power at the next election.

    Oh and he will side with National unless Labour can galvanise some serious % vote from the Greens between now and the election.

    • Takere 10.1

      Not so fast …Winston was interviewed tonight by Willie with Andrew Little on waatea. Winston doesn’t agree with any of the National party’s policy’s and performance of the Nat’s in the last 8 years and says the Nat’s won’t and can’t change their ideological make up. So …they won’t be getting his support because of this. Oppsy daisy! Keys gunnah have to grovel and suck some big ones I reckon….He can do that last bit fine!

      • Leftie 10.1.1

        Yep, people need to listen to what Winston Peters is saying, and how he says it. It is pretty clear that Winston Peters and his party will not be supporting National or anyone and/or party that supports National.

      • Hanswurst 10.1.2

        He was even stronger in 1996 with his “toxic trio” rhetoric. He still went with National.

        • Leftie 10.1.2.1

          Then he walked away and apologized for supporting the Nats in 1998. He hasn’t supported them since, but he has supported a Labour government though.

          • Hanswurst 10.1.2.1.1

            I’m not saying that I have any way of knowing which way Mr. Peters might go next year if he is in a position to influence the makeup of the government (I have absolutely no idea). All I’m saying is that scrutinising his rhetoric isn’t it.

    • mosa 10.2

      Spot on Matthew.
      Winston as i keep pointing out will support the LARGEST PARTY even from the cross benches and i cant see him going into coalition with anybody but he will keep his concessions on the table.
      He will do the “balance of responsibility” like he always does.
      Labour to be in contention needs to get votes from National, its not happening!!!
      The last time that happened was with the fall of the National led government in 1999 and the election of Helen Clark….17 years ago.
      Winston will only deal with Labour IF they have the necessary public mandate and he can be sure it is in a strong position in parliament.
      National looks likely on current polling to hang on but there is still the matter of Dunne, the Maoris without Mana and Seymour will come through in Epsom though so you can count him in.

  11. billmurray 11

    te reo uptake, You need to get a grip, Labour down to 25.5% is a disaster and as a supporter you need to start telling the truth about the 25.5%, what it really means is only 26 people out of 100 eligible voters think that Labour should be occupying the government benches, 74 people say they should not.
    Or of course it could be a rogue poll!!!!!!!. I could say LOL at this point but this is a serious matter and we must be truthful with ourselves or we face ridicule at the election.

    Something is seriously wrong that we are not attracting voters or getting traction over the housing problem, or am I the only one who believes that to be the case?.

    • Sabine 11.1

      it would in the old system, FFP? i think it is called.

      but in the environment of MMP you have a coalition option that could send National packing.

      half full, half empty, you decide 🙂

    • Labour’s vote at 25.5% is unchanged in this poll, billmurray. The significant mover is National.

      I noted in the post that, really, this poll just re-aligns Roy Morgan with reality. It’s all about the coalition and while Peters is no fan of the Greens, I don’t think that’s an insurmountable obstacle.

      My gut feeling is that Peters wants to be the guy that brings Key down. Sweet revenge for costing him 3 years in the wilderness in 2008.

      But, whatever happens, on these numbers, control of forming the next Government is out of Key’s hands.

      • ScottGN 11.2.1

        Exactly. And whatever happens the next government is going to be very different from the one we are burdened with presently and that’s got to be an improvement.

        • Leftie 11.2.1.1

          +1 ScottGN.

        • Henry Filth 11.2.1.2

          There is a reasonable chance that the next government will be the current government.

          Do not let your desires blind you to the stones beneath your feet.

          • ScottGN 11.2.1.2.1

            Sorry but apart from the occasional, erratic swing on the RM the polls are now consistently showing NZF holding the balance of power in any governing arrangement. It’s probably safe to assume a markedly different tone from whichever parties form government if that is the case.

      • billmurray 11.2.2

        te reo uptake, Why are Labour getting no traction or attracting voters with the housing problems besetting this country.
        They should be at 35% and they languish at 25.5%, WHY????.

    • Scott 11.3

      I think it is plain what the problem is. Labour are, and have been for a while now, focused on preaching to the converted few. The membership seems to want that as a party, and the leadership they have chosen are giving them it. They love to hear the familiar tune.

      That is all well and good, but it doesn’t help when it comes to appealing to the middle voters, and it is they who decide elections.

      Labour face a problem. Be “stanch” to the beliefs of it core membership, or be prepared to take those views and allow them to inform a policy and approach that might be found to be representative of a larger part of society, a part capable of electing them to power.

      If Labour want to continue on their current path and expect society to change its collective mind, then they should get used to the opposition benches. They might have a 1 in 4 or so visit to the other side as boredom sets in, but that is all, and even then they will need to share the space with the Greens.

  12. Colonial Viper 12

    Labour 25% +/-3% on election day.

    • Lanthanide 12.1

      Still a long way to go till the election.

      • Colonial Viper 12.1.1

        National no longer appeals, Labour still doesn’t appeal, Greens don’t know how to break their electoral ceiling; NZF a clear gainer again next election, I reckon.

        • billmurray 12.1.1.1

          CV, Winston “who is” the NZF. You are right. If you were Winston would you pick Labour for a coalition partner?.

          • Colonial Viper 12.1.1.1.1

            No, because IMO Labour will not negotiate any serious concessions with NZ First or the Greens.

            Who with these poll numbers will make up 48% of the MPs in the Government, however I think that it is safe to guess that Labour will want to keep 3/4 or more of the Cabinet positions for themselves.

            • Leftie 12.1.1.1.1.1

              I don’t think that is true Colonial Viper and Winston Peters thoroughly enjoyed working with a Labourt government last time. Greens are not an issue as people would like to think. Peters has softened considerably on that score.

              • Lanthanide

                Winston enjoyed working with Helen.

                Little ain’t no Helen Clark.

                • Leftie

                  So? there is still no reason why they can’t work together.

                • Haha I have a feeling he’d enjoy Little even more. Helen could keep Winston in check, wheras he’ll run circles around Little.

                • AmaKiwi

                  Helen didn’t have to work with Winston that much. She made him Foreign Minister and sent him globe trotting first class.

                  • Colonial Viper

                    that was a mutual arrangement which suited both perfectly. That same arrangement won’t work this time around.

                    • alwyn

                      “won’t work this time around”
                      Why on earth not?

                    • Colonial Viper

                      Because Winston wants a new game to play in, not a rerun of what he has already done.

                    • alwyn

                      “a new game to play in”
                      That doesn’t leave very much does it?

                      PM? I cannot imagine either National or Labour giving that up.

                      High Commissioner to London, or Ambassador to Washington? Possible, but I don’t think he would accept instructions from a Minister of Foreign Affairs just yet and he could be fairly easily sacked. Probably after a couple of years more in Parliament, say late 2019, when he will be almost 75.

                      Governor-General? Oh dear. Someone might actually go along with that! Help.

                    • Make him Minister for Housing. Gives him a legitimate reason to complain about immigration, and has the positive side-effect of dinging NZF if housing policy doesn’t address the crisis fast enough. 😉

            • AmaKiwi 12.1.1.1.1.2

              Colonial Viper

              Behavioral political science says you are wrong. Unless the Labour caucus has a death wish (there is evidence it does), they will give away as much as they have to in order to form a coalition.

              Politics is the art of compromise.

      • billmurray 12.1.2

        Lanthanide, you may be right but there is nothing to suggest that Labour can improve if they cannot get traction on the housing issue “ain’t them the facts”????.

        • BLiP 12.1.2.1

          Its not just the housing issue. Its the entire gambit – education, health, human rights, public safety, water, crime and the police generally, Christchurch, smouldering resentment in the provinces, Te Tiriti and Maori land issues, our international standing and reputation, inequality, hungry children, and 41,000 homeless people. National Ltd™ has fucked *everything* up. The Opposition parties need only speak truth loudly while pointing proudly to the solutions they offer from now until the election because National Ltd™ only got lies and excuses. Its not a matter of whether National Ltd™ will lose, its a matter of by how much.

          • Lanthanide 12.1.2.1.1

            But none of that seems to matter with the clown in chief in charge.

          • billmurray 12.1.2.1.2

            BLiP, okay you are right, but why are Labour not getting any traction in the polls??.

            • BLiP 12.1.2.1.2.1

              Dunno for sure. Not offering much of a difference from National Ltd™, I suspect. Not talking about the actual cause of the degradation of democracy and equity in Aotearoa under John Key and his bankster mates. Greens are looking good, though. That’s the best news from this latest Roy Morgan effort.

            • AmaKiwi 12.1.2.1.2.2

              “Why are Labour not getting any traction in the polls?”

              Because people vote emotionally, not rationally. Watch Sanders, Corbyn, Trump, Le Pen . . . NZ politics these days is an emotional wasteland.

            • Matthew Whitehead 12.1.2.1.2.3

              Because Labour are led by a robot and are infested with out-of-touch careerists who don’t know how to create an emotional resonance in the population that makes people enthused to vote, and think that if they just figure out how to run the country in the most centrist, technocratic way possible, people will support them. And that’s just not how politics works.

              It’s possible there are problems with the Greens, too, that are holding them at a similar level of support. If so, I’m probably too close to see them. To me it looks like the issue is that the Greens’ message is getting so filtered before it gets to the wider electorate that it’s not doing its job. (The number of times I have to explain how media coverage is creating inaccurate expectations of What The Greens Are About is hilarious)

              • Hanswurst

                It’s possible there are problems with the Greens, too, that are holding them at a similar level of support. If so, I’m probably too close to see them.

                I would say that James Shaw looks far less passionate and emotionally persuasive than Andrew Little. Metiria Turei… quite the opposite, but the media have a shameful habit of not taking her seriously.

                • Really? I always had the opposite opinion. Don’t get me wrong, there are criticisms of Shaw to be had, but I never found him robotic the way I do for Little.

                  You’re right about Meyt, though. I think they ignore the “corporate lawyer” part of her bio and skip straight to the “anarcha-feminist” part.

            • Stuart Munro 12.1.2.1.2.4

              The last RM, a blatant falsehood endorsing National, is the answer.

              A false poll is of enormous value to biased media hacks. Place it in Russia: headline reads “95% of the population support Putin”. Opposition parties suffer voter apathy and defection, although the real number was much lower. Rolling attack stories can be written ‘explaining’ opposition unpopularity.

              Labour are rising in actual polls – but actual polls are not the preference of MSM hacks. This may be partly self-censorship, media folk who criticise Putin die, and media folk who criticise Key have their jobs disappear. A useless government cannot survive an informed populace – and they know it.

              • Leftie

                +1000 and thousands more Stuart Munro. That’s the truth some on here don’t want to see.

              • Colonial Viper

                A false poll is of enormous value to biased media hacks. Place it in Russia: headline reads “95% of the population support Putin”.

                Putin’s approval rating in Russia is only around 80%. That is up on 3-4 years ago, since the Russian public realised that the West was working all out to destabilise their country’s economy.

                Opposition parties suffer voter apathy and defection, although the real number was much lower. Rolling attack stories can be written ‘explaining’ opposition unpopularity.

                Perhaps you don’t understand Russia like you think you do. If Putin’s party United Russia collapsed in popularity, the biggest winners would probably be a harder line Russian Communist Party and other pro-nationalist leaning groups.

                Not the Soros funded pro-neolib pro-western faux parties.

                • Stuart Munro

                  I’ve got a pretty good idea what’s going on in Russia thanks CV. Chiefly a very successful propaganda ministry modelled on Al Jazeera that is beating the living crap out of the US’s Faux News networks.

                  Neither of the three parties you mention are democratic, and thus none are legitimate. The scary thing is how Putin will use this new power – and it seems he wants to regain the territory Stalin obtained from Hitler in the Molotov Ribbentrop pakt.

                  Now, if he were to turn democratic and abandon conquest I might have some time for him. But my friends, journalists obliged to flee for their lives, are less forgiving.

              • Which actual polls are those?

                I do actually agree that some polls are biased, but RM tends to be the most reliable of the lot, and makes a real effort to get things accurate between the Left and Right, wheras the others mostly just indicate a trend.

                • Stuart Munro

                  My background isn’t in polls but I’ve used some stats in sampling.

                  If your sampling error is creating substantial variation that shows up across the board. If one major group is varying substantially without plausible cause, but another is static you don’t have sampling error, what you have is bias.

                  • RM generally varies from the others leftward, but it also trends closer to the General Election results too, suggesting that it’s an issue of the NZ-based pollsters engaging (wittingly or unwittingly) in bias towards the right-wing. That’s why I was surprised you were calling them out for bias towards National- it looks far more likely this was simply a rogue poll.

                    • Stuart Munro

                      It is possible that the results were polling error.

                      But a 10% jump in National at odds with prevailing trends would have attracted strong caution on the part of any rigorous pollster.

                      If you look at the two anomalous data points, boosting National is consistent with a purchased bias. Suppressing Labour so that they don’t budge as National’s data artifact is corrected is also consistent with a purchased bias.

                      I cannot prove RM has sold out, but the 10% hike shows they are at best unreliable. The failure of the Labour number to fluctate is inconsistent with the wild fluctuation of the National figure. These are not the kind of numbers to publish unless one particularly enjoys professional ridicule.

    • billmurray 12.2

      VP I could say that your +3 for Labour is you being generous in the extreme, the housing problem should have Labour at 35%, you have been consistent in your opinion on Labours traction and polling abilities. Not always agreeable to me but well done.

      • alwyn 12.2.1

        He didn’t just allow +3.
        He merely thinks they will get between 22% and 28%.
        I find it just as hard to see them getting down to 22% as you appear to see them getting up to 28%.

    • Leftie 12.3

      I dunno, then again you could be wrong too Colonial Viper.

  13. save nz 13

    Good news!

    • James 13.1

      Labour poll at 25.5% and lefties call it “Good News” – its sad really.

      NZ needs a decent opposition.

      • Sabine 13.1.1

        hhahahahahah.
        that was funny.

      • Stuart Munro 13.1.2

        No – the story is RM adjusts ad hoc poll – Gnats drop 7% but Labour unchanged. This is statistically… ‘unlikely’.

        If there is variation in one major party, that variation should appear in all. The Gnat correction relates to errors in the previous poll, but Labour numbers exhibit no variation. Cause isn’t statistical.

      • Yeah, the problem seems to be that people are waiting for Labour to step up, rather than switching over to the Greens, who have been driving opposition policy for years.

    • billmurray 13.2

      Save NZ, when did you have your lobotomy?.

      • save nz 13.2.1

        @Bill Murray – I see your feeling defensive now the Natz are on their way down 7%. I guess polluting a town’s water supply, denying a housing crisis, selling off the country and being investigated for tax evasion by the EU is finally starting to show in the polls.

        • save nz 13.2.1.1

          Labour are still on 25% because they don’t understand the housing crisis. There is no wonderful solution to this clusterFuck apart from reducing immigration, stopping foreign investors, getting wages up dramatically, reducing the costs of building a house, stopping the sale and building more state houses, kickstarting our economy into the 21st century. Add this to pulling troops from middle east, stopping mass surveillance, stopping corruption, cleaning up all the pollution, stopping assets sales, stopping TPP. Pretty simple really, sarc.

          Voters have worked out Natz are failing (7% drop) but less convinced that Labour have the answers in their Nat Lite approach such as supporting the unitary plan which is a scam and will do little for the affordable housing crisis but can do a lot to disenfranchise local property owners and increase risks of rate rises with having to pay for infrastructure for more houses, to house some offshore person’s possible money laundered ‘gold bricks’ investment. Yep maybe Asian Leaders are keen as are the developers, but do locals really have more of an obligation to house Asian students investments or should we be concentrating on Kiwi’s reliant on local wages. Since this is not an easy one, then making housing the pinnacle of Labour’s policy, is not going to translate into more votes and could do the opposite and push voters back to the Natz.

          Labour need to be more active in stuff that are clearer and safer and differentiates themselves from the Natz. Such as TPP no way, stopping asset sales and the sell off of NZ (the water bottling is a great example of how our assets are being plundered with Kiwis not getting any gain), lack of rail infrastructure and the escalating pollution levels in all areas such as water pollution. They also could be pro teachers and small communities, health care (all round not just one of two issues of funding of cancer treatments) – appeal to Mothers who don’t like the Natz, etc. There are very important issues that are key to middle NZ switching to National but Labour are being bogged down in other issues such as housing that can not be solved or communicated easily. They fucked it up last time, thinking that middle NZ wanted to work longer for retirement and have more taxes so we can help those .01% make more money under Globalism, because the MSM and a whole lot of lobbyists told them so. Sorry, don’t think so.

  14. sweety 14

    With the Maori King’s backing Maori Party they could get 3 or 4 seats. Cat amongst the pigeons?

    • Muttonbird 14.1

      I think Maori are highly suspicious of the Maori party’s subservience to the National government.

      Not sure how Hone Harawira can work with Mr. Underpants and the National party.

      • billmurray 14.1.1

        Mr Underpants ($54) or as some say in the Waikato”Tuku big balls” cannot stand Winston and vice -versa, does that fact help Labour?.

        • Lanthanide 14.1.1.1

          I thought they were $80?

          Edit: looked it up, $89: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuku_Morgan

          • billmurray 14.1.1.1.1

            Lanthanide and Edit, I stand corrected” Mr Underpants$89″, I could buy 89 pairs for $89.00 at the local Chinese clothing shop in Otahuhu, good ones to.

            • alwyn 14.1.1.1.1.1

              You won’t be able to if Winston gets to be part of the Government.
              There won’t be any “Chinese clothing shop” in any New Zealand town or any Chinese goods coming into the country will there?

      • The Chairman 14.1.2

        “Not sure how Hone Harawira can work with Mr. Underpants and the National party.”

        Perhaps Hone feels Labour have left him little choice?

        He wasn’t keen on joining in with Labour and the Greens (MOU). Not that Little seemed too willing to have him.

        • Leftie 14.1.2.1

          Apart from your assumptions The Chariman, Hone Harawira walked away from the Maori party when they supported National’s Marine and Coastal Act 2011 (that replaced the F&S), remember?

          • The Chairman 14.1.2.1.1

            Then Labour turned their back on him in 2014.

            And Little still doesn’t seem keen to work with him.

            Furthermore, it seems you are out of touch. Hone is open to seeing what the two party Presidents can come up with (see link below).

            Comments by the Maori King, Kingi Tuheitia, that he favoured a strong relationship between the Maori Party and the MANA Movement as the representative voice for Maori in the political world, were welcomed by MANA leader Hone Harawira.

            http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1608/S00292/the-kings-call-for-mana-maori.htm

            • Leftie 14.1.2.1.1.1

              The problem was the involvement of Dotcom, no opposition party were supportive of that. Hone acknowledges that. No one is keen if Hone Harawira repeats his mistake by aligning himself with National’s Maori party. Hone has publicly said he will work with anyone except National, and the Maori party is wedded to the Nats, so how is that going to work The Chairman?

              • The Chairman

                “The problem was the involvement of Dotcom”

                Apparently not.

                Dotcom is no longer a factor, yet Labour still aren’t keen to work with Hone. Indicating there is/was something more to it. Note, this is before Hone has made any formal agreement with the Maori party.

                “Hone has publicly said he will work with anyone except National, and the Maori party is wedded to the Nats, so how is that going to work The Chairman?”

                As shown above (in the link provided) looks like Hone has changed his mind. However, it’s early days, thus we’re yet to see what shape a new relationship will take. It depends on what the two party presidents can come up with.

      • Leftie 14.1.3

        +1 Muttonbird and Hone Harawira has said he will not work with any party that supports National, so how can he form an alliance with the Maori party that is so supportive of it?

    • Leftie 14.2

      It’s not the only movement Sweety, don’t forget Ratana that fully supports Labour.

        • Leftie 14.2.1.1

          Lol already read that opinion. Pure propaganda. It read like a National party spin sheet.

          Watch the link Paul has put up on Open Mike.

          • The Chairman 14.2.1.1.1

            Tuku Morgan attacking members of the Labour Māori Caucus is part of the strategy outlined in the link you claimed was pure propaganda.

        • Colonial Viper 14.2.1.2

          And so, politically at least, a strategy is needed to strengthen the King’s hand in the realm of Parliament.

          Cue the King’s speech of 2016 that attacked Labour.

          It was claimed the King went off script this year. But this is not the case.

          Labour leader Andrew Little was set up – he was sitting front and centre moments before the King’s address was delivered.

          Little’s only saving grace was that a Labour press secretary was tipped off by the media manager of the King’s coronation that the King’s critique was about to come.

          With the King about to launch an attack, a golf cart was called on to whisk the Labour leader to safety, away from the embarrassment that would soon unfold.

          The King said he would not be voting for Labour again and criticised the leader for his unwillingness to work with the Māori Party.

          He then went on to back the Māori Party, with a nod also to Hone Harawira’s Mana Movement.

          Leftie, did this incident not actually happen?

          • Leftie 14.2.1.2.1

            Andrew little talked about it on Waatea 5th Estate in his interview. Paul put up the link on Open Mike.

            I always find TV 3’s version of events a bit skewered and one sided, don’t you Colonial Viper?

            • Colonial Viper 14.2.1.2.1.1

              Yes watched that interview, I think Little did quite well on it, but then again if Winston had also been in the studio then the balance of the interview would have been different again.

  15. The Chairman 15

    “It’s likely that Labour will win all the Maori seats”

    Not if they manage to pull off this game of thrones

    http://www.nbr.co.nz/opinion/nz-politics-daily-maori-kings-and-kingmakers

    • BLiP 15.1

      Yep. Fantasy and lies are all National Ltd™ have, and always have had. Now the polls are starting to reflect that fact is becoming more and more apparent. About time, really.

      • James 15.1.1

        I think we need a list of Blip lies.

        Apart from one outliner – National are higher than they have been in any Rm since since March.

        Labour havnt been this low since May 2015.

        • Colonial Viper 15.1.1.1

          I’m unsure why the Left finds the need to put such a positive spin on what are at its basis very concerning poll results.

          Housing price crisis, homelessness crisis, immigration crisis, shitty water crisis, NZ child poverty in the international news; KiwiBuild is apparently popular but Labour stays unmoved in the mid 20’s and National stays in the mid 40% range.

          • TheExtremist 15.1.1.1.1

            That’s how I read it but as a Green supporter I find the uptick positive. If I were a Labour man I would be concerned

          • Matthew Whitehead 15.1.1.1.2

            Yeah the only positive part of this poll really is the uptick for the Greens.

          • Chuck 15.1.1.1.3

            All these “crisis issues” you would of thought the Nats would be in the mid to high 30’s and Labour neck and neck with them.

            What will be scary for Little and co. is zero cut through todate…it will be lambs to the slaughter come the 2017 debates between Little and Key…and Key is not the lamb.

            • Colonial Viper 15.1.1.1.3.1

              I agree that there has been month of bad news for Key, his unpopular pushing of the TPP, sheepgate and other problem issues, yet national holds comfortably in the 40-plus percent range.

              The Opposition hasn’t taken highly differentiated positions which interest the public, preferring to critique detail instead of offering clear alternatives.

              But, is it enough to win him a 4th term?

    • Colonial Viper 15.2

      “It’s likely that Labour will win all the Maori seats”

      BTW. It’s this kind of attitude which ensures that Labour’s potential MMP allies run a mile.

  16. Pat 16

    In RMs last 3 polls they have had National at 43, 53 and now 46%…….I would suggest they have some work to do on their methodology before they regain some credibility.

  17. Lanthanide 17

    Hmm, yes, overall RM does seem a bit bouncier than the others, with the previous one being a particularly bad example.

    Be interesting to see a calculated variance for the polling per company, Not sure how you’d go about that. swordfish?

  18. Olwyn 18

    I am confused and don’t know what to think. On one hand, a polling company that brings out a poll a couple of weeks late, with triumphalist editorialising thrown in, doesn’t convince me. On the other hand, we have little else to go on as to how the parties are faring, and Labour really should be getting more traction given the difficulties and hardships many people are facing.

    • s y d 18.1

      Olwyn if you are confused, how do you think people who don’t really care that much about politics feel?
      Labour still don’t ‘represent’.
      There seems to be a massive disconnect between how they think most people live and the reality of life in NZ for probably 60% of citizens. From 2006 census stats…

      “44.4 percent of people aged 15 years and over in Tauranga City have an annual income of $20,000 or less, compared with 43.2 percent of people for New Zealand as a whole.”

      This is a party that is talking about $500k affordable houses FFS.

      I mean 20k per year or less, 44%. Theres a winning margin right there.

      Just need someone to represent.

      • Anne 18.1.1

        You can’t “represent” when the voters are ensconced in a blanket of TV reality and cooking shows – not to mention the bitchy ‘house-wives’ of Auckland. If you were to say to them: Labour has come up with a major policy to solve the housing crisis do you like it? They would not have the faintest idea what you are talking about.

        Labour is not going to make spectacular progress until closer to the election when one hopes the good voters will syringe their trash-filled ears [metaphorically speaking] and finally start to hear what Labour is saying.

        • s y d 18.1.1.1

          See Anne, to me, your comment reads like you are viewing from the same platform that most of the labour MP’s seem to be standing on.

          The platform from which you can view the ‘voters’, with their trash filled ears, huddled in their blankets of TV reality.

          If you were to say to them…”Labour has come up with a major policy to solve the housing crisis do you like it?” they would laugh and say yeah, love it, I’ll take three of those affordable houses thanks, then go back to working like a dog for $15 and hour, and paying it all out on rent and food.

          One hopes doesn’t one.

          • Anne 18.1.1.1.1

            … your comment reads like you are viewing from the same platform that most of the labour MP’s seem to be standing on.

            My comment is based on knowledge and experience of numerous younger relatives and acquaintances between 25 and 45 years of age. I believe they are fairly well representative of people in that age bracket in particular.

            I actually have very little direct contact with Labour MPs so my views are, more often than not, independently calculated. True, they tend to be similar so clearly I am on the same wave length as most of them. 🙂

        • Leftie 18.1.1.2

          Well said Anne on both comments!

      • Olwyn 18.1.2

        To both s y d and Anne – I partially agree with each of you. This is a divided, unequal society. National firmly takes the side of the winners of this unequal game, pandering to a few in the middle to make sure it gets over the line. But there are obstacles to Labour firmly taking the side of the losers – a hostile media, fear of reprisal from lending institutions, financial flight, the drying up of donations, etc. So it tries to appeal to a broad cross section, whose interests are split by inequality. Pitch to the poor and the struggling middle class fear that they will pay for it with their taxes. Pitch to the middle class and the poor feel disregarded, as if they are being offered an electoral choice that is like the choice between a visit from the cops or a social worker.

        And to Anne: I very much hope you are right, and that by the election Labour has its message straight and that people are listening. But I also feel as if I have held onto that hope for a very long time.

        • s y d 18.1.2.1

          Thanks Olwyn and Anne – I agree with the idea that labour is struggling to know where to ‘pitch’ their message.
          But I still think the polling reflects that they are pitching to maybe 30% of the population, at best. And I think a lot of that would be punters who vote labour regardless.

          And I still reckon the so called middle (or us losers) is much, much poorer than labour would have us think or believe. Maybe the message needs to be to the poor, the struggling working and middle class, that they are in fact all poor.

          Another quote…”In Tauranga City, 15.6 percent of people aged 15 years and over have an annual income of more than $50,000, compared with 18.0 percent of people throughout New Zealand” … or alternatively 85% earn less than a grand a week gross, 800 bucks a week in the hand. That isn’t wealthy or rich or winning, that is pathetic and barely enough for a dignified life.

          Labour – Trying to be all things to all people.

          • Leftie 18.1.2.1.1

            I disagree that “labour is struggling to know where to ‘pitch’ their message.” Did you understand what Anne and Olwyn said?

            Labour – Trying to be all things to all people.

            What’s wrong in that?

            • s y d 18.1.2.1.1.1

              by trying to appeal to everyone, including the 15% of citizens who earn over 50k, you end up polling at 25%

              • Colonial Viper

                Don’t bother arguing with a Labour stalwart like Leftie, apparently they have their messaging and comms under full control.

  19. Grantoc 19

    The probabilities of how the 2017 election results will turn out haven’t changed with this poll.

    Despite TRP’s histrionics; National is still well ahead; Labour continues in the doldrums, a Greens/Labour coalition still can’t muster enough votes to form a government; and NZ First remains the ‘king maker’

    To get across the line it’ll have to be a coalition of the unwieldy and the unreliable and the unlikely with Peters calling the shots. But even this is only a remote possibility; there are no signs that NZ First is willing to sign up for it.

    Apart from this the RM poll is notoriously unreliable anyway.

  20. mauī 20

    Looking like a strong election for the Greens and Winnie. Impossible to figure out how Labour will go looking at the RM polling trend graph.

  21. mosa 21

    If this poll had Labour up ten percent from where they have been for some years now then i would be optimistic about a change next year ….. but they have not moved and that all important trend is backing that argument up.
    In every MMP election for twenty years the LARGEST party has formed the government because the have had a mandate and get the first chance to form a working administration and command the authority of parliament even if that means as in the last Labour led governments a minority status.
    In these polls the National party even if they are dropping 7 points are still in the box seat and Winston for all his trickery with words knows that he can still prop up a fourth term National government acting in a position of responsibility by staying on the cross benches and supporting them on a case by case basis.
    What would really make it interesting is if Labour comes up level pegging with National in support and they are close or tied that would be a nail biter in terms of who gets first go at forming a government and who Winston and his caucus would give their loyalty to in a tied race….it will be who gives him the most concessions and baubels of office.
    At the mid twenties Labour has too get its support up and it must come from Nationals current vote.

  22. Henry Filth 22

    Historically, Labour win when “it’s time for a change”, AND they have a charismatic leader able to tap the groundswell of popular discontent.

    Policy seems to be the third thing in the list of things that get Labour elected.

    • Stuart Munro 22.1

      Charismatic is not the adjective that Helen Clark brings to mind.

      The virtue in demand varies with what’s in short supply. Key was able to fill the charm gap left by Brash and English. The next election might choose honesty, nationalism, governance, or the ability to complete construction projects – if so, the Key Kleptocracy is doomed.

      • Henry Filth 22.1.1

        Perhaps not, Stuart. Perhaps, though, charisma is in the eye of the beholder.

        Perhaps in 1999 Labour were beneficiaries of (a) Three strikes, you’re out! And (b) having decent policy.

        I’m inclined to think that Labours success rests on a tripod of dissatisfaction, policy, and charisma. And that the tripod can balance on only two legs -for a while.

        • weka 22.1.1.1

          Replace charisma with competency and it works for Clark. People want the country in a safe string pair of hands.

      • Leftie 22.1.2

        +1 Stuart Munro

      • Brutus Iscariot 22.1.3

        NZ was in short supply of derp going into 2008?

  23. Labour_voter 23

    National gaining 10% in the last poll is not correct and National losing 7% in this poll is also not correct. The Roy Morgan poll has become really inconsistent. However, the only consistent factor in this equation is Labour at 25% which is not a good sign at all.

    • Muttonbird 23.1

      Perhaps both results for Labour are also incorrect. You do state the National result are wrong and that RM is inconsistent.

      • Leftie 23.1.1

        Well said Muttonbird. Funny how there are those that don’t see that side of things.

    • Bearded Git 23.2

      Look at my Roy Morgan rolling averages above.

    • Sadly, the RM is pretty discredited. Something is badly amiss in their methodology and it’s only in recent times they’ve realised that we have MMP in NZ, so their commentary on the results is also suspect. You are wrong to think that Labour are genuinely at 25%. That undervalues the LP considerably. Most other polls, which are less volatile, have Labour a couple of points either side of 30, which is still not ideal, but at least puts them in a strong position to form a government.

  24. Rosie 24

    I have a question in regard to UF and ACT’s amount of power as pawns and what happens if Nat candidates take their seats. Possibly it’s been answered elsewhere.

    Ok, so Epsom put Rimmer up again, and he tales the seat. Here in Ohariu I have a feeling that Dunne won’t stand again. In 2017 he will have held the seat for 33 years. He faced a big shock in 2014 when Labour’s Ginny Andersen closed in on him. He’s looking tired and bored. More bored than usual. He will not want to face defeat.

    IF he steps down and National party guy Brett “egg head” Hudson, whose a list MP runs again, which he will, and wins the seat we still have a problem don’t we? Whether it’s Dunne or Brett Hudson?

    I know it’s all about party votes in MMP but I want to see Ginny Andersen take Ohariu because we need a smart on to it modern politician like her, here in this seat and she needs to be in parliament.

    • Bearded Git 24.1

      Not really Rosie because Dunne’s seat is an overhang. So if he loses to a National candidate that is still one less seat for the anti-left coalition.

      • Rosie 24.1.1

        This is what I hear, but in terms of sheer numbers of nat MP’s that get voted in either on the list due to numbers of party votes or hypothetically, if Hudson took the Ohariu seat, how, does it actually work?……….Do we have that one extra overhang seat because of the mechanics of MMP, and if Dunne were to go we’d be looking at 120 seats instead of 121? So with Dunne gone, but Hudson in, that still weakens the position for the Nat’s ?

        Apologies.

    • weka 24.2

      If National take the seat then it is absorbed by their party vote and they’re one vote down in govt. So Dunne resigning would be fantastic. Plus an end to that one seat balance of power centrist thing.

      Anderson taking the seat would be great, not just for you locally but to solidify the electorate on the left. Will be interesting to see what the Greens do.

      • Rosie 24.2.1

        Right! Goodo! Thanks weka.

        What I’m hoping will happen is the Labour and Greens sit down and talk about this quandary. In 2014 approximately 2000 + electorate votes went to their Green candidate, Tane Woodley, that could have gone to Ginny and she would have won hands down. She was only approximately 720 votes behind Dunne. The narrowest gap for a long time.

        I would like to think the members of Ohariu Green take a vote on whether they stand their candidate again, and for the sake of attempting to change to government, look at bigger picture and vote against standing a candidate in Ohariu.

        I think it would be best they talk it though and take it to a vote so people get a say. Doing this would be an educational process too. You’d be amazed at how many people in the electorate don’t understand of the concept of strategic voting in an MMP environment.

  25. tom 25

    None of the comments i read talk about the Media, PR influence on how people think. National have this side covered, and is the main reason i believe they do well, it sure ain’t their policies.
    They spent vast sums on PR, never before have NZ had so many PR people in Govt, there are now more PR people than Policy people, which is an abject disgrace, and a signifier of how far down that path we are going. Not to mention Crosby Textor, and the horrors they purport on the general public, swindling them of any rational thought with exceptionally evil BS propaganda.
    It is easy for people who are into Politics to read btwn lines, see PR spin, see dodgy MSM avoiding important issues etc etc, but the layman out there in kiwi land has not the same inclinations towards politics or ability to see around spin etc.
    This in my opinion is the most important fact around National’s success, and as Labour cannot match them for $ to pay for the same PR, or for allies among the Corporate establishment (to the same level), my opinion is to make the Vast PR Propaganda machine a public issue – as is, waste of money (inefficient), growing Public service when they were saying they were reducing, when they only reduce the services not the staff, so a net loss, and is at its core anti democratic, in that democracy needs informed public to be a true democracy, it is propaganda under a different name and average Kiwis do not like being treayed as such, but what they do not know they cannot be against
    If i were Labour or opposition i would fight to have PR industry bought into the light from its deep shadows it hides under now and shine a light on the horrors they do to prevent the public from being an informed public
    Also i beleive Labour should say categorically in whatever public domain they get that the MSM is biased and we need a real public broadcaster again with a iron clad charter, so govt is always hands off, and with no directive for advertising, as this again brings in Corporate influence. As Corporate media are only going to support Corporate Ideals, nad as we know they are a shambles in terms of balance (Hosk, Henry, Plunkett- they are our 3 main channels, as 1 example)

    • Colonial Viper 25.1

      A lack of PR resources and competence is only one factor contributing to Labour’s deep seated lack of appeal to the electorate.

      • tom 25.1.1

        But Nationals incompetent too, very, Education – a joke, Saudi sheep?, Health – a disgrace, Key himself is a joke, all the Ministers are corrupt, bereft or incompetent and have no empathy for normal working people (the majority of our democracy). National in reality are not appealing at all. I could go on and on and on….
        Except for their PR which makes all the things i said look and smell like roses, and makes Labour look millions of times worse than they are.
        Again we need to look at things thru the eyes of Joe average with no ability to see thru the BS, and in my dealings with everyday people this is what i find – they have been spun into a web, and Labour cannot compete with that
        I believe if PR and MSM were not part of the game Labour would be toe to toe with national, and i actually fully believe that JK would never have been PM without spin, or at least turfed out by now, normal Joe average would hate the man if they could see the reality. Dirty politics for 1 example, without cover of MSM and PR, Key would have been like Nixon, as what his office did – smearing with leaks from Intelligence agency the Leader of Oppostion in the lead up to the election is a Major deal, it is anti democratic at least, and should have been his end and National’s for a long time, spin and MSM is what saved that from that fate, that is just one of many many examples IMO

        • Colonial Viper 25.1.1.1

          But Nationals incompetent too, very, Education – a joke, Saudi sheep?, Health – a disgrace, Key himself is a joke, all the Ministers are corrupt, bereft or incompetent and have no empathy for normal working people (the majority of our democracy). National in reality are not appealing at all. I could go on and on and on….

          National are far more appealing to the Kiwi electorate than Labour, and the poll numbers over the last 10 years show it.

          I believe that this difference is primarily because National is fulfilling its historical mission of being the party of the top 5%, whereas Labour is not fulfilling its historical mission of being the party of the working class and the under class.

          The MSM has been against Labour since the days of the Waterfront Lockout and before.

          • tom 25.1.1.1.1

            “I believe that this difference is primarily because National is fulfilling its historical mission of being the party of the top 5%, whereas Labour is not fulfilling its historical mission of being the party of the working class and the under class.”

            But why would 95% of population vote for the party of the 5% unless they were being duped. So again i believe PR and MSM are the main reasons why average Joe votes National, and historically as you point out, we have still had a biased MSM, not as bad as now, granted, but still that and old school type PR, which has been around ages (see Adam Curtis’s – Century of the Self – doco series thru BBC, really excellent doco’s) but has now become a science in last 20 yrs and has gone stratospheric into pure brainwashing

            • Colonial Viper 25.1.1.1.1.1

              But why would 95% of population vote for the party of the 5% unless they were being duped.

              You start from the premise that Kiwis are smart, practical people, and work it out from there.

              You don’t start from the premise that Kiwis are uneducated, uninformed, naive, gullible dupes.

              Is propaganda and mainstream bias part of it – yes, definitely. But it is only one factor.

              • Reddelusion

                I think the dumb kiwi is over played CV, similarly I think the so called dumb kiwi is very much aware that this is the elite left political classes view of them which also does not help

                • tom

                  ” I think the so called dumb kiwi is very much aware that this is the elite left political classes view of them ”

                  Have you read Hollow men as that is the view that National has of its constituents, as shown categorically in that bk, again is part of the PR spin that gets thrown around without a shred of balance or fact, and the opposite is true, the left respects the worker and his rights and intelligence, the right have always tried to muddy the waters to make it seem as if they have best interests at heart while doing the exact opposite of that, and destroying the lives of the working class.
                  Again all about PR spin and MSM narrative that keeps working people from the facts about national lies

                  • Reddelusion

                    Only if we where so enlightened like you Tom, how do you do it

                    • tom

                      you could read as a start, and probably best to read both sides of an argument so you have a full understanding of the issues.
                      But i have to say i am no smiling Buddha (enlightened), just a brother who has studied, and for that, read widely for a long long time, and is confident to speak on subjects i feel i am informed on.
                      If your not a troll then you may take this piece of advise, to watch the doco series i referenced yesterday _ Century of the Self by Adam Curtis, is only 4 hrs and i believe covers a lot of ground around the PR issue i am talking about, is very enlightening.
                      can reference many other doco’s and great books if you want me to, am more than happy to do so
                      Of course if you are a troll you will not bother.

          • Observer Tokoroa 25.1.1.1.2

            . Your summation is good CV

            . But I would add that there has been a tremendous pull on the voters towards parties that promote wealth as the holy grail.

            . “Greed is Good” – the greed promted by Wall St, Alan Greenspan, Thatcher and Reagan. All of them sucking up to Ayn Rand. The disastrous pied pipers of
            greed.

            . It will take time for people to realise that wealth always goes to fewer and fewer very wealthy people. While the less wealthy get poorer and poorer. It will take a few more decades for the diarrhea of greed to wash through the global world.

            The Labour Party is on the shelf, because it is prudent, caring and constructive. In a word it does not promise individual wealth. Just a fair go. While people want WEALTH. Labour also damages itself by lack of unity and the inability to select charismatic leaders.

            So, here and elsewhere in the world, Democratic Governments such as Labour are being avoided.

            The debt that burdens New Zealand will be one of the scourges that brings New Zealanders back to their normal selves. By that time foreigners will have acquired all our good assets and all our opportunities.

            ..

    • Leftie 25.2

      Completely agree with your comments Tom.

  26. Reddelusion 26

    How does it work if greens and nzf combined exceed that of labour, what a cluster duck of a coalition, no real dominant party. National has so much material to discredit such and arrangement even before considering having little angry andy day in day out in the publics face during an election campaign. In this regard I am sure JK is sitting back very content at current polls

    • tom 26.1

      “very content at current polls”

      what a hack comment, honestly, they are going down and down again, the only thing keeping them on course is vast PR and MSM friends keeping so many major issues out of the public domain, or at least muddying the waters with spin, if that falls away so does National, reminds me exactly of Wizard of Oz, once the veil is gone all that is left is a small little coward of a man

      • Leftie 26.1.1

        Lovin your comments Tom

        • tom 26.1.1.1

          thanks leftie i appreciate yr comments on here also

        • mosa 26.1.1.2

          Tom you are right on the nail with your analysis of what effect the National party and its friends are having on the manipulation of the public through the MSM.
          The right wing have always been the most active in the print media with tactics like anything negative about the Labour party is always on the front page.
          Nasty editorials, photographs and cartoons all subtle criticism of anything related to the left and suppression of letters to the editor in defence of the lefts position has been standard practice no more so with National in government.
          Any story likley to cause negative publicity or damage to the current government and lets face it there has been a lot is never on the front page and is always printed on pages 23-26 or at the back of the paper out of harms way.
          The Herald on Sunday ran the headline “He is our boy” and a photo of a beaming John Key the morning after the 2014 election no prizes on guessing who the Herald were backing in the election and their delight in their candidates success.
          Yet Helen Clark achieved a third term and the Fairfax Sunday Star Times the following morning could only snipe that the country had moved right and no congratulations on achieving an amazing success yet she had won with a majority of two seats and ahead in the percentage of the vote.
          This government and its PM have had a dream run based on the bias in our media who like the opposition has a responsibility to the country to inform and challenge the government with interviews and in depth reporting and analysis of the direction and policies they are promoting.
          The change in our media and its direction should concern all kiwis yet most dont even notice that it no longer working to inform them but to brainwash them to the corporate right wing direction that the current government is taking the country.

          • tom 26.1.1.2.1

            Cheers, as you can tell i hate state Propagandists (and private ones too, don’t want to leave out those nasty little hack cretins), and our Incorporated media, and believe very strongly that the detrimental effects on our society that are caused by these people go by and large unstated, so the wider public has no understanding of the manipulation, and just how their decisions are being affected.
            And am positive no RW Govt would ever get into power in this country if people were given balanced and unmanipulated information to make their decisions on.
            your analysis is bang on, and just the tip of a massive massive iceberg

      • Reddelusion 26.1.2

        Stick to children books Tom

        • tom 26.1.2.1

          good burn mate, keep it up
          great comeback, really detailed and on point
          just showing how pathetic you are, and have no factual basis to attack me on

          grow up

          • Reddelusion 26.1.2.1.1

            You did not state any facts tommy, simply a deluded opinion

            • tom 26.1.2.1.1.1

              OK buddy. nice one, top shelf trolling there, on top of your game, keep it up, really forcing me to think real hard about how to respond to your political astute comments

              • Reddelusion

                Not trolling Tom just trying to highlight to you your feelings or opinion are not facts

                • Colonial Viper

                  Did you not know Reddelusion, National has been dropping in the polls for a full 8 years now, currently they are down to about 45% and dropping like a rock lol

                • tom

                  well it is a comment section of a blogsite so i was unaware i needed to make a thesis argument here with references and ‘facts’, please refer me to the rulebook, i obviously wrongly thought it being called the comment section, meant i could write a comment. I was posting my position, in that Polls and public opinion are based on manipulated information by hack PR and biased media, that was my main point, there are plenty of facts about this, am happy to provide if asked, but you asked no specifics, just burnt me with the greatest burn ever ‘ stick to children’s books’, BOOM!

      • Bob 26.1.3

        “what a hack comment, honestly, they are going down and down again”
        Yours is the hack comment! Remove the last 2 poll results (the last one where they jumped 10% was an obvious outlier) and National is flat for the past 12 months.
        Labour on the other hand have steadily dropped over the past 12 months from hovering around the 30%’s down to 25.5%, their lowest result since the last election: http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/6946-roy-morgan-new-zealand-voting-intention-august-2016-201608291538

        • McFlock 26.1.3.1

          Why are you ignoring two data points for the nats but not Labour?

        • tom 26.1.3.2

          you said Nats and Key are not worried will be sitting back, i know for a fact that is total BS, so yours is a hack comment.
          They are worried, they know these are not outliers, why? because even with MSM and PR trying to say no crisis with homelessness/housing, it is a national and international disgrace and people even in a mindf..k of PR are seeing the ‘nothing to see here’ standard line from Key and ‘Labour did it too’, as what they are; PR lines for someone with no idea of whats happening on the real world.
          They can comeback, especially with the resources they have of PR and Media, (and is dependant on Labour Capitalising, which has not been a strong suit of Labour’s in recent times), but not while they keep ignoring crisis’ that people on the ground know to be true, lying about that means that people start to see thru the other crap they spout, especially as the housing issue does not just effect the poor but the middle classes and even the upper middle classes are affected by this, as their children cannot get on the ladder they used anymore. This is a problem, National ignore it at their peril, of course they do not want to act on it as that would require either raising wages or dropping house prices, so they are on a bit of a hiding to nothing on this, and i laugh watching it, i also cry as i watch NZ burn.
          Finally the polls have been turning ever since the announcement of Left coalition, and that has been consistent, maybe not for labour, but the coalition as a whole, and the Nat’s know this too.

          • Reddelusion 26.1.3.2.1

            Again deluded opinion and poll movements are in margin of error territory. Once a poll goes the other way is everything you said above redundant ?

          • Bob 26.1.3.2.2

            Tom, I normally don’t like using ad hom attacks, but your are actually an idiot, here’s why:

            “you said Nats and Key are not worried will be sitting back”
            I said no such thing, Reddelusion said that, you came back saying that National are going “down and down”, I pointed out stats that show you are living in a dreamworld that doen’t match reality.

            “They are worried, they know these are not outliers”
            I removed an outlier that had National sitting 7% points HIGHER than this poll, if this isn’t an outlier then the ‘left’ is in far more trouble than I have pointed out. Why are you ruining your own arguments?

            “Finally the polls have been turning ever since the announcement of Left coalition”
            Nope, again, if you look at the stats, Labour were polling mid 30’s prior to the 2011 election, suddenly they lost ~5% to the Greens and never made it back. Then at the 2014 election they lost ~5% to NZ First and never made it back. Overall, the ‘left’ have hardly moved in the last 5 years, and that is being kind calling NZ First ‘left’. In reality, there is no way Winston will play 3rd fiddle to the Greens, so all bets are off when it comes to his backing at the next election and the ‘left’ are still in real trouble.

            • tom 26.1.3.2.2.1

              Apologies you did not say that, it was the deluded one.
              I stick by what i said in that since the announcement of the coalition the left has consistently, as a block gone up, and the Nat’s are slip slip sliding.

              My main point though has been and is, that PR and biased media are distorting public opinion with straight out Propaganda, and it is not healthy for a society to be consistently lied to, and the result is people vote against their own best interests, based on false info, and this leads to societal breakdown as we are now witnessing.
              Any one who works in PR should know, PR was born as Propaganda, that became an unpalateable word, so being that spinning is the job, they spun that and re branded it PR, which has now been re branded again when PR became as dirty a word as Propaganda, and now call themselves ‘Comms’, which also is becoming a dirty word. So if you work in the dark arts of Comms you are a Propagandist, i hope you feel good about yourself and the work you do to prevent a true democracy from taking shape.
              If you believe in RW ideologies then why do you have to deceive to get these policies across the line, if RWer’s truly believe the crap they spout then they would not be afraid to have a proper public broadcaster and to get rid of Propaganda PR and undue influence of money in politics, and have a real democracy, as they do not it shows categorically how much they fear real democracy and know RW ideology is not something a majority of people would ever vote for if given full information to make an informed decision.
              That is my main point, Polls and their consistency do not concern me greatly (as they are so affected by the above details) like i know they do your favourite little wizard of Oz

  27. Takere 27

    Nationals internal pollster David Farrars Curia Poll puts Lab/Grn/NZF combo at 61 Seats! Oh no, they’re really in a funk!? http://www.curia.co.nz/

  28. The lost sheep 28

    Since 1996 under MMP the % of vote gained by the Party that formed the Govt. has been: 33.87, 38.74, 41.26, 41.10, 44.93, 47.31, 47.04.

    During that time the lowest Preferred PM Poll result for the Politician that became PM was 23% for Helen Clark in 1999. Since then the pre-election figure for the politician who became PM has averaged over 40%

    Current polling for the 2 measures above has National/Key sitting at 46 / 36, Labour/Little at 25.5 / 10.

    Realistically then…I admire those of you who can so bravely reject reality.

    • mosa 28.1

      Lost sheep i keep pointing out the same argument , you cant ignore those numbers as much as people think Key is gone he is still the front runner heading into next year
      I want this government out but it will have to be a watershed generational general election, a real seismic shift like 1972, 1975, 1984, 1990,1999, with a strong leader who can reach out and grab the publics imagination and is charismatic and draws people to the party.
      Its looking like 2020 before we will get our seismic shift.

      • The lost sheep 28.1.1

        Yup. When plan A is to rely on Winnie, or something even more miraculous, there must be a hep of denial going on.
        But sure as, 3 elections on and heading for a fourth, many heads on the Left are as deep in the sand as ever.

        • Colonial Viper 28.1.1.1

          but how does National add up to 49% without Winnie?

          • The lost sheep 28.1.1.1.1

            National + ACT + Maori + UNF + NZF = 58%
            Labour + Greens + NZF = 49%

            The first option delivers a Govt. with a leader / deputy leader combo that meets the approval of 49.8% of voters.
            The second would only satisfy 22.6% of voters.

            Do the math. Look at Winnies history and then get over the delusion you can count Winnie in.
            As i say, ‘if that’s the only ‘plan’, your strategy is in a sad state indeed.

            • Chooky 28.1.1.1.1.1

              not only “lost” but deluded….Winnie hates jonkey nact

              … this jonkey nact government the worst in New Zealand’s history …betrays utterly everythting NZF stands for !

              …and Winston has worked well with Labour in the past. He was a superb Minister of Foreign Affairs

              … no one hates and spins as much against Winston Peters as a right wing Nact…they spin so hard and fast that their tails get stuck in their mouths

  29. Pat 29

    253 comments (and counting), and a lot of angst about a suss poll 12 odd months out from an election…..meh.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts