Roy Morgan: NAT 48.5% (up 1.5%), LAB/GR 41.5% (unch)

Written By: - Date published: 1:37 am, February 20th, 2016 - 392 comments
Categories: Politics, polls - Tags:

The latest Roy Morgan poll has been released.

Presented with no additional comment:

During February support for Nationals was up 1.5% to 48.5% well ahead of a potential Labour/Greens alliance 41.5% (unchanged) in the second Roy Morgan New Zealand Poll for 2016. If a New Zealand Election were held now the latest NZ Roy Morgan Poll shows National would be re-elected comfortably.

Support for the National partners showed a sharp fall in support for the Maori Party, down 2% to 1%, Act NZ was 0.5% (unchanged) and United Future was 0% (unchanged).

Of the three Parliamentary Opposition parties – Labour’s support is now at 27% (down 0.5%), Greens 14.5% (up 0.5%), NZ First is 6% (down 0.5%). Of the parties outside Parliament the Conservative Party of NZ is 1% (unchanged), the Internet-Mana Party alliance is at 0.5% (up 0.5%) and support for Independent/ Others is 1% (up 0.5%).

The NZ Roy Morgan Government Confidence Rating is 128pts (down 3.5pts) in February. A majority of NZ electors 56.5% (down 3%) say NZ is ‘heading in the right direction’ compared to 28.5% (up 0.5%) that say NZ is ‘heading in the wrong direction’.

392 comments on “Roy Morgan: NAT 48.5% (up 1.5%), LAB/GR 41.5% (unch) ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. ropata 1
    20 February 2016 at 2:07 am

    All is peaceful in Aotearoa.

    Marketing defines reality.

    Nothing much will change until we realise that we don’t have a democracy any more, and our core institutions have been privatised, and we suffer a local version of the GFC, and mass unemployment and poverty can no longer be covered up.

    • Labour_Voter 1.1
      20 February 2016 at 10:02 am

      No need to worry. Labour + Green + NZ First = 47.5 and just a point away from toppling National. Maori party will support Labour. Andrew Little’s dynamic leadership and magnetic personality will swing voters to Labour during the campaign period. Andrew’s superior knowledge of economy and finance matters will ensure he wins the televised debates against Key. Don’t lose hope Labour supporters.

      [lprent: If you want to attempt sarcasm then please attempt to inject some intelligence and not to run under a false flag. Otherwise I tend to err on the fine line between good sarcasm and troll in favour of education. Banned 4 weeks for stupidly trolling with no intelligence. ]

      • Old Tony 1.1.1
        20 February 2016 at 7:01 pm

        I am kinda stunned by the editorial comment. Whoever the poster is, the facts about the numbers stack up. So the only way that this can be deduced to be sarcasm is if one (namely the editor) believes it is impossible for AL to be/achieve the things described. Not exactly an expression of confidence.

        • One Anonymous Bloke 1.1.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 7:09 pm

          Pop goes the weasel: too many adjectives.

          It’s interesting how readily the modern Right resorts to Stalinist and/or Nixon-type tactics.

          It’s almost as if you think you invented them.

      • Tautuhi 1.1.2
        20 February 2016 at 10:19 pm

        Television debates are a waste of time Labour, Greens and NZF should boycott them especially if the court jester Hoskings is involved!!!

        • Richard McGrath 1.1.2.1
          22 February 2016 at 9:45 am

          I agree. Debates are just an opportunity for two or more people to shout over each other. A half hour interview with each of the party leaders and/or live televised opening address before the party faithful would be much better IMO.

      • Mosa 1.1.3
        21 February 2016 at 7:51 pm

        Under MMP to win Labour needs the largest party vote plain and simple not just falling over the line with the Greens
        They need 42% plus to have any authority in the parliament and confidence -supply
        A working majority is s must if they are to survive 3 years in a hostile right wing establishment if Helens last 3 years are anything to go by.

  2. the pigman 2
    20 February 2016 at 2:20 am

    (unch) is about right 😉

    If kiwis can watch police descend on a street in Mangere and pepper spray children, then their area commander has the gall to go on National Radio and suggesting that those same community members had no right to be on the(ir!) street and brought it on themselves – well – things are heading down a very dark path indeed.

  3. Redbaiter 3
    20 February 2016 at 3:15 am

    Really, its long past time that you guys woke up to how Key continues to beat you.

    Its not rocket science, yet it appears Labour strategists are completely bereft of any ideas for turning things around.

    Why can’t you see the reality that is there in such stark open relief??

    Key has moved into your territory. He’s basically kept everything moving along as it was when Helen Clark was PM. He’s moved the National Party left economically and socially.

    That’s only part of Key’s plan.

    He knows that due to ideological paralysis, the Labour Party will not go right. He knows you will only go further left.

    Which gives him his master stroke. He knows (through polling) that the NZ public does not want to go any further left, and will reject any party that tries to take them there. Right now, the NZ public is as far left as they ever want to be.

    So there you are, painted into a corner by Key’s cunning strategies and your own intransigence. which he was always counting on, and you have not disappointed him.

    Between a rock and a hard place and unable to think of a way out of this entrapment.

    There is a way out. You have to adjust to the situation. Just like Key did. Drop the far left and stop them from polluting your public profile. Make your focus jobs and economic improvements by means of reducing red tape and other factors which may be unpalatable to you but not to mainstream NZ.

    For a few examples-

    Drop the AGW BS. Jobs jobs jobs.
    Drop the environmental BS. Jobs jobs jobs.
    Drop opposition to TPPA. Key won. You lost. You’re flogging a dead horse. Let it go. Jobs jobs jobs.
    Shut down unnecessary Govt depts. Start with Joyce’s MBEI. Jobs jobs jobs.
    Drop all the distracting BS about sexism, racism, homophobia, Islamophobia blah blah blah. Jobs jobs jobs.
    Don’t try and buy votes with offers of free stuff. That trick is played out and has reached the end of its use by date. Jobs jobs jobs.

    In other words move away from your far left ideological positions and outflank Key by playing him at his own game.

    Unpalatable as it is, its the only way you’re going to win an election.

    I’ve said this before. It falls on deaf ears. I don’t expect it to be any different this time, but sooner or later, the Labour Party has to make some radical changes or it will be in opposition a long long time.

    Just as Key has planned it. As long as you cling to far left strategies, you’re going to be his bitch, and he’s going to continue to laugh at you.

    • Stuart Munro 3.1
      20 February 2016 at 3:58 am

      You wouldn’t know far left if it bit you – but the wheels are coming off much faster than you think – don’t expect to miss the backlash.

      • marty mars 3.1.1
        20 February 2016 at 9:15 am

        + 1 I love it how rightwackers state their views, designed for their own selfish ideals, and do so with a straight face expecting lefties to take them seriously. This is the dogmatic and authoritarian side of righties and they are so dim they think everyone bows to the uniform like them – lol sad, for them.

      • Nessalt 3.1.2
        20 February 2016 at 5:04 pm

        doom and gloom and promising violence. better take to the internet forums where you can say what you want with no fear of backlash. I bet if the back lash arises you’ll be cowering at the back just to claim you were there

        • Stuart Munro 3.1.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 10:06 pm

          At least I will not be singing happy songs with the ‘nice’ Mr Key and the inept Bill English while our country is ruined and our people starve.

          • Colonial Viper 3.1.2.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 10:16 pm

            Just remember that during Ruth Richardson’s time chiild poverty rates shot up, and during Helen Clark’s time, those poverty rates levelled off.

      • Steve Withers 3.1.3
        20 February 2016 at 5:07 pm

        Don’t reply to Redbaiter. He’s a disease we don’t need to feed.

        • Wainwright 3.1.3.1
          20 February 2016 at 5:44 pm

          +1 Steve

        • Redbaiter 3.1.3.2
          20 February 2016 at 7:49 pm

          Thanks for the reply Steve.

          BTW, IIRC you once frequently posted under the Redbaiter handle yourself when you were into the cowardly and dishonest device of internet impersonation.

          Are there any worse scum on the internet?

        • Tautuhi 3.1.3.3
          20 February 2016 at 10:22 pm

          Redbaiter has shifted his focus from Kiwiblog to The Standard, the fish bite harder here?

          • Redbaiter 3.1.3.3.1
            21 February 2016 at 12:54 pm

            Kiwiblog commenters intensely dislike criticism from the right.

            I’m sick of that bunch (largely) of weak confused psychopaths/ Progressives.

            At least Labour makes an attempt to stand up for what they believe in.

        • Richard McGrath 3.1.3.4
          22 February 2016 at 11:08 am

          I think it’s more a case of not being able to handle a few home truths about the Labour Party and its poor fortunes of late. Redbaiter is spot on with his advice.

    • miravox 3.2
      20 February 2016 at 6:28 am

      There’s no point in that. Then Labour would be National.

      I’m in the Left sphere for all those ‘few examples’ and more.

      I’m not in it to be National.

      Although I think your ‘buying votes’ is simply left-leaning policy for previously ignored groups that you reluctantly acknowledge are worthwhile – so much so that National does it too.

      • Redbaiter 3.2.1
        20 February 2016 at 10:23 am

        “There’s no point in that. Then Labour would be National. I’m in the Left sphere for all those ‘few examples’ and more. I’m not in it to be National.”

        Look, I actually admire your stand on principles, but your problem is that Key has no such principles.

        He’s quite happy for Nats to be Labour, which is why he’s moved them left and virtually carried on with Helen Clark’s economic settings. Key is quite happy to surrender principles for power. Its a Crosby Textor thing.

        Your problem is how to deal with this situation, and if you don’t deal with it, you’re stuck in opposition.

        I’m suggesting a solution. I don’t see anyone here so far suggesting any alternative solutions.

        Many are just expressing disagreement with my own suggested course of action. Fair enough, but what’s their plan?

        If anyone does have a different plan, stating clearly how they’re going to win votes and eventually replace National, I’d like to hear it.

        • miravox 3.2.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 10:33 am

          Yes, I take your point on Key & Crosby Textor.

          Your solution is fine if I wanted the same policies but with different faces. I don’t want that. I want different policies.

          As it stands, each time Labour drags National leftwards is a little victory, even though Labour does’t get credited with it (The Greens probably consider Labour environmental policies similarly). If Labour heads toward National to get voted in, for me that’s a defeat.

          I know you don’t get it, but I want them to win on Leftist policies.

        • Puddleglum 3.2.1.2
          20 February 2016 at 3:57 pm

          Hi Redbaiter,

          “He’s quite happy for Nats to be Labour, which is why he’s moved them left and virtually carried on with Helen Clark’s economic settings.”

          I think this is simply incorrect and, more to the point, there’s evidence that the National cabinet itself believes they are moving policy and economic settings further and further to the right.

          According to Colin James in 2013:

          “Ministers are privately saying they are achieving substantial right-leaning economic reform bit by bit without, so far, scaring voters. National’s polling has edged down a bit but an incumbent government four years into office in any other rich country right now would die for its ratings. Ministers have got bolder.“

          • Redbaiter 3.2.1.2.1
            20 February 2016 at 7:55 pm

            Kind of funny that a claim like that rests here without an example.

            Key said WFF was “communism by stealth” but after he was elected he did nothing.

            He’s spending far more than Clark ever did.

            He’s taxing more than Clark.

            Debt is greater than under Clark.

            Public service numbers are same or greater than when Clark left office.

            Those are my examples.

            • DoublePlusGood 3.2.1.2.1.1
              22 February 2016 at 2:35 pm

              Does any of that hold up if you make it per capita? I doubt it – we’ve had significant public growth, and those numbers you’re touting, if they have grown, likely haven’t grown as much as the population.

      • Redbaiter 3.2.2
        20 February 2016 at 10:39 am

        BTW Miravox-

        If you really don’t like the policies you go to the election with, you can go back on them once you win power.

        Its why I am so pissed at the Key govt.

        Key spoke on certain things, and promised other things that induced me to support him, but when he gained govt, he abandoned them.

        The guy is IMHO opinion a charlatan and a chameleon. He decried Helen Clark’s policies when in opposition but embraced them in govt.

        As objectionable as you may find it to break election promises, you still need to figure out a practical way to defeat Key.

        Is using his own tactics against him such a bad and untouchable solution?

    • Keith 3.3
      20 February 2016 at 7:57 am

      With the exception of blog sites like this there is next to no criticism or hard analysis of the many shortcomings of this government in the corporate media. Want proof, read Heralds Audrey Young anytime, it goes from sycophantic school girl love letter writing such is her crush on Key to plain propaganda for National.

      RNZ try but Nationals ministers simply refuse to front and RNZ know any overt criticism will be a real risk to funding.

      The Herald campaigned successfully to have Keys tea towel flown from the harbour bridge (why? ) so why couldn’t they do likewise and campaign about the corruption that is the Saudi sheep deal, rather than have apologist articles on it from senior journalists, or the very dodgy murky Tamaki Redevelopment Company who somehow, through political connections, have managed to obtain vast amounts of taxpayer owned houses and land in Glen Innes, Pt England and Panmure? You just don’t know about it. And that is to name but a few of the many dodgy goings on of this government.

      And when Stephen Joyce bailed out his old firm Mediaworks with Taxpayer money, where the hell was the outrage from the media then about this appalling conflict of interest and hugely questionable use of public money? What it did do of course was buy National friendly TV and radio coverage and it didn’t cost National a cent! So it’s a cold day in hell when you will see them go after National, Paul Henry, Mark Weldon ring a bell?

      And lets not talk about the fudged stats National rely upon to reassure the muppets everything is going well when it is not!

      Or the corporate medias involvement in Nationals smear campaigns, 100k bottle of wine anyone? Cheers NZ Herald!

      Delude yourself all you want, but if we had an independent media NOT owned by the wealthy who rub shoulders with National, who questioned these rather corrupt politicians and scratched the surface even a little, they would have been gone before the last election.

      • David H 3.3.1
        20 February 2016 at 9:29 am

        “RNZ try but Nationals ministers simply refuse to front and RNZ know any overt criticism will be a real risk to funding.”

        But this time they are not asking for any extra funding..

      • Sacha 3.3.2
        20 February 2016 at 10:27 am

        “the very dodgy murky Tamaki Redevelopment Company who somehow, through political connections, have managed to obtain vast amounts of taxpayer owned houses and land in Glen Innes, Pt England and Panmure”

        Isn’t it simply an urban development company set up jointly by council and govt, who transferred the properties they owned into it? You are about to see the same approach in Onehunga. It is common overseas. Where’s the murk?

        • Keith 3.3.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 12:37 pm

          Throwing 2800 tenants (thus far) out of state houses so this prime real estate can be sub divided to the highest bidder, oh and with a bit of state house redevelopment is a prime recipe for the get rich quick brigade. Drive around there to see whats going on, the vacant land, the boarded up houses, all of which is too valuable to have riff raff taking up oxygen in those fields.

          And I am unsure quite how Auckland Council came to get suckered into this property development “deal”, them being 41% share holders, Nick Smith and Bill English being 29.5% respectively with a number of National Party connected people involved in the TRC. I guess they somehow had to go along with it, swallow a social dead rat or two, maybe Len was offered a deal he couldn’t refuse, who knows because as i said the corporate media are not going to look into this are they?

          This thing just came from nowhere, nothing in Nationals manifesto about flogging off taxpayer land or assets for “redevelopment”, nothing at the 2011 election telling us displacing state housing tenants was a good thing!. But sure as shit there is $$$ to be made for those in the know.

          And where is the oversight and public voice of this limited liability company who have taken taxpayer assets, none that i have seen!

          • Sacha 3.3.2.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 1:37 pm

            Council has been involved in redeveloping Tamaki for over a decade, well before Len’s time.

            • Keith 3.3.2.1.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 2:58 pm

              No, it was the Auckland City Council way back then and there is daylight between now and then . Then it was standard council suburban revitalization of town centres, railway stations, library’s and things that benefit ordinary residents, now its full on speculator property developments. I don’t ever recall ACC planning on evicting state housing tenants, never in their mandate actually, ever. Gives the TRC a bit of cred though if you blame earlier councils for things they did not do.

      • Steve Withers 3.3.3
        20 February 2016 at 5:12 pm

        “Delude yourself all you want, but if we had an independent media NOT owned by the wealthy who rub shoulders with National, who questioned these rather corrupt politicians and scratched the surface even a little, they would have been gone before the last election.”

        Agreed.

        That’s why people who give a rat’s need to front up with some money to help sustain alternatives.

        No use moaning about the corporate media if we – all of us – aren’t willing to fork out $500 / year to pay for an alternative.

        If 10,000 people did that, we’d have $5,000,000 to fund a real news source.

      • Tautuhi 3.3.4
        20 February 2016 at 10:25 pm

        Investigative Journalism is dead in NZ?

    • Paul 3.4
      20 February 2016 at 7:58 am

      Have you seen Adam Curtis’s ‘Century of Self’?
      You should.
      “This series is about how those in power have used Freud’s theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy. The story of the relationship between Sigmund Freud and his American nephew, Edward Bernays. Bernays invented the public relations profession in the 1920s and was the first person to take Freud’s ideas to manipulate the masses. He showed American corporations how they could make people want things they didn’t need by systematically linking mass-produced goods to their unconscious desires.
      His most notorious coup was breaking the taboo on women smoking by persuading them that cigarettes were a symbol of independence and freedom. But Bernays was convinced that this was more than just a way of selling consumer goods. It was a new political idea of how to control the masses. By satisfying the inner irrational desires that his uncle had identified, people could be made happy and thus docile.
      It was the start of the all-consuming self which has come to dominate today’s world.
      ” – Adam Curtis

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_YLy6yZeaw

      Then you would understand why a government representing the interests of the !% gets so much support?

      This book also will help you
      Deer Hunting with Jesus: Dispatches from America’s Class War

      http://www.amazon.com/Deer-Hunting-Jesus-Dispatches-Americas/dp/0307339378

    • Nelson Muntz 3.5
      20 February 2016 at 10:28 am

      Sell our souls for power? That’s the sort of think Key and the Natz would do!

    • savenz 3.6
      20 February 2016 at 10:31 am

      If Labour does the opposite of Redbaiter then progress might be made.

      One thing is clear, if this poll is accurate then Labour’s policy of not being clear on TPP is pushing them down. A bob each way (we don’t need to be popular) is not winning anyone over!

      Also bypassing the MSM by the opposition using their websites to clear up policy might help. Not just polls emailed out to people.

      Remember Northland, the opposition did win by clear campaigning and a cohesive attack and alternative.

      • rhinocrates 3.6.1
        20 February 2016 at 5:56 pm

        In the case of Northland, it’s a village and New Zealand’s worst-kept secret was particularly well-known there. That would have influenced the vote to some degree.

        I agree strongly overall though.

      • KS 3.6.2
        21 February 2016 at 8:38 am

        “If Labour does the opposite of Redbaiter then progress might be made.” – You mean like the Labour Party is doing in the UK?

    • Paul 3.7
      20 February 2016 at 10:37 am

      So have 2 parties that stand for exactly the same thing.
      So what’s the point then?
      No principles, no ideals, no vision…… simply power for power’s sake?

    • Paul 3.8
      20 February 2016 at 10:38 am

      Bernie Sanders looks like he’s doing very well because he does offer an alternative.

    • TheBlackKitten 3.9
      20 February 2016 at 6:43 pm

      Your wasting your time. The issues you list are ones that the Labour Party of Kirk would have focused on. The Labour Party of today has been hijacked by tree hugging liberal academics who would not have one iteoa of an idea of what the economic concerns are for those that live on a 40 hour a week wage and instead focus on identity politics such as gender balance, positive discrimination and other pointless pandering to minority groups that do jack shit to help the average family pay for the basic necessities such as housing, food and power on today’s wages.
      The shame and sadness is that those in the Labour Party would rather loose elections for the next 100 years than face that hard reality. The response of you are getting for your comment is a classic example of that.

      • Colonial Viper 3.9.1
        20 February 2016 at 6:47 pm

        One reason Labour has such a strong focus on identity politics today is simply because it cannot differentiate itself sufficiently on the financial or economic front, from National.

        • Sacha 3.9.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 8:08 pm

          Do you believe the ‘Future of Work’ policy development perpetuates that problem?

          • Colonial Viper 3.9.1.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 8:28 pm

            There are a number of problems I see with the Future of Work policy development programme.

            From a purely election cycle perspective, it has happened far far too slowly. I could have got a dozen people together in a room and generated more worthwhile material in 6 weeks than Labour has in the last year.

            The upshot of this slow movement is that Labour has not left enough time for a real discussion of concrete options to occur in the electorate before the next election.

            From a strategic perspective, I do not believe that Labour should have started with “the Future of Work.”

            I believe that the only starting point which makes real sense is looking at the “Future of the Economy”.

            “The Future of Work” material would have them become very clear from that.

            You will note that in Labour’s latest PR release of Future of Work materials completely avoided mention of deregulation, free trade and corporate power as factors driving negative changes in employment, employment conditions and employment relations.

            In fact, Labour appears to favour blaming “technological change” as the only factor worth mentioning specifically.

            Again this is evidence of how Labour struggles to differentiate its economic framework from National, mainly because it is not that different at its core: give way to corporates, keep hands off the market, it is not government’s role to create employment itself if the private sector fails to (but government is allowed to train people – even if jobs do not exist at the end of that training).

            • savenz 3.9.1.1.1.1
              21 February 2016 at 9:33 am

              +100 CV especially “You will note that in Labour’s latest PR release of Future of Work materials completely avoided mention of deregulation, free trade and corporate power as factors driving negative changes in employment, employment conditions and employment relations.

              In fact, Labour appears to favour blaming “technological change” as the only factor worth mentioning specifically.”

              Labour need to actually stop playing at being politicians and actually look at the HARD problems facing the world and NZ, globalism, climate change, immigration, economic factors within these New conditions. Technological change has been going on for 300 years, but other factors deregulation, free trade and international corporate power, financial power, international taxation are problems that are occurring that the opposition seem to be ignoring because it is new and hard and any attempt at a solution might offend someone or they may get it wrong.

      • ropata 3.9.2
        20 February 2016 at 8:07 pm

        That’s a fair comment TBK but the rise of Andrew Little signals a shift back to basics. Labour still has a terrible image problem exactly as you describe, and middle NZ despises “hip hop tours” and “welfare queens” and smelly hippies. Even if these myths are false, they are a legacy that Labour has not moved past.

        These identity politics concerns are not going away, even National is quick to jump on the Gay Pride bandwagon, but Labour’s problem is that they focussed *only* on identity issues and ignored other social problems like child poverty and inequality and jobs. The party lost its way and almost sold its soul to the interests of the wealthy elite, forgetting its own identity and origins in the mines of the West Coast.

  4. upnorth 4
    20 February 2016 at 4:21 am

    Redbaiter is correct
    People in NZ just dislike unions with a passion but NZ do agree that there is a low wage economy and they don’t like that.

    So here is reality – the spokespeople for the low wage – unions are loathed and while they are represented then everytime they strike it is negative press.

    People say that unions represent 17% of NZ but you have to back out the PSA and Teachers union that dwindles fast. Nurses Union is clever they use the word organisation and get great public support.

    The basic fact is – Labour is broke and while it is broke they just cant get a message across.

    One question parliament on TPPA and yet it was a burning platform. Free education for the all now shows what everyone knew – people who get a degree earn more so the poor old bus driver is striking for another few dollars only have this taxed and pay for people to go to university in the future.

    I will tell you what it is worth – Labour will fall over and die if Grant Robertson future work presentation in November is a complete and utter disaster.

    If it has one clique of a inter-school debate the public will sink Labour for good and for one moment do not think this is a reality – the burning platform is close for Labour – be 100% inspiring or Labours ship is going down.

    • Sacha 4.1
      20 February 2016 at 10:32 am

      “pay for people to go to university”

      The policy also covers polytech and other trades training. Poorly emphasised in Labour’s comms perhaps.

      • weka 4.1.1
        20 February 2016 at 10:46 am

        And far too many assumptions made by the left wing commentariat that it was about Uni too (not to mention those who choose to intentionally misrepresent the policy).

        • Sacha 4.1.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 11:06 am

          Which a good comms operation would either anticipate or quickly correct.

        • Colonial Viper 4.1.1.2
          20 February 2016 at 6:20 pm

          And far too many assumptions made by the left wing commentariat that it was about Uni too (not to mention those who choose to intentionally misrepresent the policy).

          You want to retrain using this policy but have some previous trade, polytech or university training already?

          Then sorry it doesn’t apply to you.

          What a daft “retraining” policy.

  5. b waghorn 5
    20 February 2016 at 4:30 am

    I’m sorry but 48% of kiwis can get fucked , any country that accepts a pm that is as dirty as key and a party that re promotes a crook like Collins is not worthy of respect .

    • Macro 5.1
      20 February 2016 at 7:55 am

      ^ this

      • Colonial Viper 5.1.1
        20 February 2016 at 8:02 am

        The more the Political Left tell 48% of Kiwis that they can go get fucked, and particularly the majority of Kiwis in provincial/regional NZ (where National support tends to be very strong) to go get fucked, the more the Left is lost at sea.

        • b waghorn 5.1.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 8:39 am

          I’m not the left , I want an honest government first , if you can’t see that a huge part of opposition parties problem is the toxic effect of the stuff nat/act and fucking scum like slater have been up for the last 12 years, as opposed to them not being left enough then you are a fool.

          • maui 5.1.1.1.2
            20 February 2016 at 9:35 am

            The 48% probably thinks it has a reasonably honest government or they just aren’t interested in the dodgy things it gets up to. They have total faith in the spin.

            • weka 5.1.1.1.2.1
              20 February 2016 at 10:51 am

              Hey people, it’s not 48% of Kiwis. It’s not even 48% of registered voters. Remember that National’s vote last time was 30% of eligible voters.

              Today it’s 48% of people that were motivated to take part in the poll and who knew what they wanted to say. Did RM report the people who were undecided or told them to fuck off or were too busy/stressed to take part or couldn’t be bothered?

              I don’t think we should give up on NZ just yet, and we need to be very careful to not buy into the narrative that nearly 50% of this country support Key, because it’s simply not true.

              edit, “Of all electors surveyed 7% (up 0.5%) didn’t name a party.”

              Non-respondents not recorded.

              • Macro …
                20 February 2016 at 11:04 am

                Yes true weka – but remember the number of eligible voters likely to vote for the opposition is always decreasing as homelessness and those opting/dropping out increase. These people have no permanent address and hence are not qualified to be enrolled. Another National strategy to increase their percentage of votes? Probably unintended but an increasing factor I would suggest.

                • weka …
                  20 February 2016 at 11:21 am

                  I think the 30% voted for National thing was based on people eligible to vote whether they were enrolled or not. I don’t know how they count that though.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    20 February 2016 at 6:22 pm

                    Don’t go down this road Weka.

                    Because if you do then less than 20% of voters picked Labour, and fewer than 10% picked Greens.

                    • weka …
                      22 February 2016 at 12:46 pm

                      I’m well aware of that CV, but I want representative democracy at least, so I’m going to resist the meme that National have a mandate via just under 50%, when the plainly don’t. When the left get back in power, I’ll be happy to call them out on being more representative rather than claiming to have a mandate to ram things through. It’s an issue on all sides of the house.

                  • Richard McGrath …
                    22 February 2016 at 12:34 pm

                    If 20% of people don’t vote, perhaps we should leave 20% of the seats in parliament empty. Maintain the relative proportions of each party, but reflect the wishes of non-voters as well.

                    • weka …
                      22 February 2016 at 12:50 pm

                      Heh. Better yet, fill the seats with people who’d rather be at the rugby or who can’t be bothered running the country. Or give them to the anarchists,

                      Mark Twain said “Those of you who are inclined to worry have the widest selection in history.” Why complain? Try to do something about it! It’s going on 9 months now since I decided that I was gonna declare that I am a candidate for the presidency of the United States. Oh yes, I am going to run.

                      I shopped around for a party. Well, I looked at the Republicans. Decided talking to a conservative is like talking to your refrigerator. You know, the light goes on, the light goes off; it’s not gonna do anything that’s not built into it. And I’m not gonna talk to a conservative anymore than I talk to my damn refrigerator. Working for the Democratic party, now, that’s kinda like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

                      So I created my own party; it’s called the Sloth and Indolence Party. And I am running as an anarchist candidate in the best sense of that word. I have studied the presidency carefully. I have seen that our best presidents were the do-nothing presidents — Millard Filmore, Warren G Harding. When you have a president who does something, we are all in serious trouble. If he does anything at all, if he gets up at night to go to the bathroom, somehow, mystically, trouble will ensue.

                      I guarantee that if I am elected, I will take over the White House, hang out, shoot pool, scratch my ass, and not do a damn thing.

                      Which is to say if you want something done, don’t come to me to do it for you. You gotta get together and figure out how to do it yourselves. Is that a deal?

              • maui …
                20 February 2016 at 11:35 am

                Yeah good point, although it is the 48% that is counting at election time at the moment. The real reflection of support 30+% is not making itself known.

                Like you say if some stats were recorded on the people not answering the poll it would paint a different picture, and maybe change voter perception.

                • weka …
                  20 February 2016 at 1:06 pm

                  I don’t think our solutions are at election time tbh. I mean, we need to change what happens then, and I think not promoting the meme that nearly 50% of of people support National is part of that. And we have to get to grips with what is going on with all those other people, the non-30%. At the moment the conversation is dominated by CV’s perspective, which I find biased, agenda-laden, and superficial in its political analysis.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    20 February 2016 at 6:25 pm

                    Meh.

                    If you can construct a more powerful and convincing apolitical analysis of the situation, please put it forward.

                    • weka …
                      21 February 2016 at 9:31 am

                      did you really mean apolitical?

                      I’d be happy to share my own analysis CV, but you’ve just spent a good couple of months misrepresenting my views on Labour at almost every turn, so I’m not sure your invitation is genuine.

                      btw, I don’t think your analysis is either powerful or convincing. I think it’s interesting, and it’s a shame that you’ve chosen to present it in such a smeary, superficial way, because all that’s coming across to some people is that you have a chip on your shoulder about Labour, or that you’re acting out your disappointment and frustration. Yes, some people agree with you, more on specific points than strategy I think. But overall I’m not sure you are convincing that many people.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      21 February 2016 at 9:34 am

                      actually, you’re correct, I more meant non-partisan rather than apolitical.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      21 February 2016 at 9:37 am

                      BTW never claimed that I didn’t have personal motivating factors for how I view Labour today, and they are factors that everyone on The Standard is already aware of.

                    • weka …
                      21 February 2016 at 10:35 am

                      I’m not worried about what motivates you CV (your motivation looks reasonable to me). I’m objecting to how you act.

                      What do you mean by non-partisan?

                • weka …
                  20 February 2016 at 4:01 pm

                  I’m watching ep 22 of The West Wing, where they’re running a telephone poll and discussing how many people they need to phone in order to get the number of actual respondents they need. 1 in 4 people don’t hang up at the start.

              • heather tanguay …
                20 February 2016 at 9:50 pm

                You are right Weka
                we also have a real problems that our media tv and newspaper are openly brainwashing the community into the fantastic success of key

              • savenz …
                21 February 2016 at 9:38 am

                +1 Weka – don’t believe the polls!

                If Labour want to know what their supporters are worried about they just need to tune into the Standard ha ha.

                Of course according to Nash the Standard is wrong and not worth bothering about!!!

          • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.1.3
            20 February 2016 at 9:47 am

            happy to be called a fool.

            But blaming the opposing team for your own series of losing performances is not going to get you any where.

            Just like blaming the NZ Herald for anti-labour and anti-worker bias. They’ve only been that since the days of the ’51 Waterfront strike and the decades before.

            • b waghorn 5.1.1.1.3.1
              20 February 2016 at 12:39 pm

              Its hard to beat a team playing with a stacked deck that lies ,then defends that lie long enough for it to become the truth in the unthinking voters mind,
              That sets traps like saying it isn’t going to make surplus then tweeks the books to fudge a short term surplus so it can embarrass the opposition.

              • Colonial Viper …
                20 February 2016 at 6:34 pm

                It’s amazing that Labour hasn’t figured out how to counter this situation of MSM bias and political dirty tricks after the better part of a century of more of the same.

          • pat 5.1.1.1.4
            20 February 2016 at 9:49 pm

            +1 ..and that should be the priority

        • marty mars 5.1.1.2
          20 February 2016 at 9:22 am

          nah cv – some may have given up but the rest of us haven’t and we will keep saying get fucked to the supporters of the disgusting and shameful key and we will do that until they pull the megaphone from our cold hands. That is commitment and integrity – not trying to play all sides, kowtowing in fear or pretend caring. The ONLY answer is commitment to our ideals, ethos and beliefs.

          • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.2.1
            20 February 2016 at 9:50 am

            there is nobility dying in a ditch holding the flag high, but maybe first check that you are fighting the right battle with good leadership in the smartest way possible.

            • marty mars 5.1.1.2.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 10:17 am

              we work with what we have rather than what we think we should have – that is how you survive and thrive when times are very tough

              • Colonial Viper …
                20 February 2016 at 6:37 pm

                I’ll pick another strategy, thanks, one which doesn’t start with telling 48% of Kiwis to fuck off as self centred self serving ignorant shits.

                • marty mars …
                  20 February 2016 at 6:44 pm

                  so interesting to see your projection – I never said that but you did – hmmm – you should imo stick to your ‘strategy’ of calling Little and labour “self centred self serving ignorant shits” rather than the public – it suits you and the agenda you are immersed in

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    20 February 2016 at 6:52 pm

                    I stand corrected; B Waghorn merely stated that 48% of Kiwis can go get fucked.

                    I disagree with the sentiment.

                    • marty mars …
                      20 February 2016 at 7:08 pm

                      yes it seems those 48% are now your bedfellows – good luck with that

                      I’ll repeat, “we work with what we have rather than what we think we should have – that is how you survive and thrive when times are very tough”

                    • b waghorn …
                      20 February 2016 at 7:20 pm

                      Some of those 48% will be people I know and in some cases love , they know my views on their voting for a bunch of shit bags.

          • Karen 5.1.1.2.2
            20 February 2016 at 10:51 am

            Well said Marty Mars. I’ll stand with you.

            And message to CV – it was a lockout not a strike.

            • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.2.2.1
              20 February 2016 at 6:41 pm

              Cheers for the clarification Karen.

              • savenz …
                21 February 2016 at 9:49 am

                The situation with CV vs some of the Labour faithful, is parallel with what is wrong with Labour.

                You guys agree with each other 90% and just waste time arguing and abusing each other because it is easier than actually changing Labour and doing real work!

                Labour need to change, listen, respond and collaborate even with ex Labour supporters, if you do not you will not get elected!!!

                Ex Labour supporters are representing the 15% of votes Labour has lost!

                p.s Helen Clark lived in a different era. What made people vote for her can not be replicated 10 years on, we live in a different world now of globalism where the decisions of the previous 30 years has started catching up with big problems and the voters want that acknowledged with a credible plan!

                • Colonial Viper …
                  21 February 2016 at 9:56 am

                  Ex Labour supporters are representing the 15% of votes Labour has lost!

                  Yes, it is a huge number of voters. And these are voters who were absolutely loyal to Labour and who most often will not ever vote for anyone else so just end up not voting. (A few will go to NZF).

                  BTW my position 2 years ago was that Labour could be changed, but in fact, the entrenched establishment players like the way it is now and fight tooth and nail against any actual change.

          • Ben 5.1.1.2.3
            20 February 2016 at 11:57 am

            marty mars: “we will keep saying get fucked to the supporters of the disgusting and shameful key”

            So people are not allowed to support who they want? Suggest you focus on the politicians and not the supporters, who no matter who they support are for the most part, decent hard-working people.

            If you met me in a social setting would you tell me to get fkd just because I don’t share the same political views as you?

            • marty mars 5.1.1.2.3.1
              20 February 2016 at 12:22 pm

              I would if you were gushing about how much you love key and how great he was.

              I would if you were dissing the disadvantaged in society and reveling in their misfortune.

              and i would if you were saying racist, sexist or other bigoted statements or jokes about those without power or privilege.

              apart from that i’d probably just ignore – so good call ben, glad i could clarify, thanks.

              • Ben …
                20 February 2016 at 1:24 pm

                Glad I could help you express yourself more clearly. Anyone spouting the examples you give deserves a serve back.

          • Chuck 5.1.1.2.4
            20 February 2016 at 5:22 pm

            I can’t fault your dedication to the cause marty mars, and long may you go around calling mum and dad kiwis, fuck wits. Its good for a couple more % point gains for National.

            • marty mars 5.1.1.2.4.1
              20 February 2016 at 5:24 pm

              look up chuck – I have clarified – and I never called mummy and daddy kiwis fuckwits – just so there is no misunderstanding

            • b waghorn 5.1.1.2.4.2
              20 February 2016 at 6:40 pm

              He he chuck proves that at least some nat voters are fuck wits. Own goal there chuckles.

        • upnorth 5.1.1.3
          20 February 2016 at 9:28 am

          CV I don’t always agree with you but you are bang on here.

          The left just don’t get it

          My estimate of Labours supporters are like this

          Unions people 30%
          Labour voters historical 30%
          Anti Nats regardless of any leanings 10%
          Socialist who would vote hard left if there was a hard left party 10%
          On the day voters 20%

          National made up of
          Business minded 40%
          Rural NZ 40%
          On the day voters 20%
          Conservatives and hard right vote NZF and Conservatives

          Therefore 48% of NZ just plainly think Labour and Greens are damaging to NZ

          The straight image people get of Labour is this TAX

          Everyone who doesn’t work gets money from TAX paid by workers

          NZers are totally fearful of any party who says the TAX – its an image now closely aligned to Labour.

          That’s why I say until Labour can spend money on messages rather than made up cliques they are doomed.

          I repeat – if Grant Robertson and Andrew Little deliver up a senior college debate presentation they are toast let me repeat – TOAST

          • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.3.1
            20 February 2016 at 9:52 am

            “TAX” is no big deal to most NZ voters, because most NZ voters want public services and social benefits that keep the country going.

            The lack of separation between National and Labour is a big deal to voters, however, IMO.

            • BM 5.1.1.3.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 9:56 am

              Think you’ll find tax is a big deal for most working people.

              • Paul …
                20 February 2016 at 9:58 am

                Most rich working people.

                • BM …
                  20 February 2016 at 10:06 am

                  Yeah, nah think you’ll find most working people like to be taxed as little as possible.

                  You’re a socialist, therefore you love tax, the majority of people are not socialists, therefore their enthusiasm for tax isn’t quite as high.

                  • Paul …
                    20 February 2016 at 10:08 am

                    And the 2010 tax cuts by the National Party benefited the rich.
                    And you know that.
                    BTW saying yeah, na does not make you cool.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    20 February 2016 at 12:24 pm

                    low taxes are all well and good until you realise that your family member can’t get a critical MRI scan for 3 months, or that the drug you really need has plummeted in availability due to problems with cheap generic substitutes.

                  • UncookedSelachimorpha …
                    20 February 2016 at 12:34 pm

                    Most working people would pay a lot less tax under most left regimes (both as tax, and indirectly by better / cheaper services).

                    Higher tax on the wealthy would allow it.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      20 February 2016 at 6:44 pm

                      The tax target that needs to be hit, if any are to be hit, are those corporations doing over $100M in business a year.

                      That and some asset and financial transactions taxes, will be all NZ needs.

            • Labour_Voter 5.1.1.3.1.2
              20 February 2016 at 10:08 am

              Colonial Viper – What you say is 90’s thinking when NZ voted for tax increase. Time has changed. Except for the 27% Labour voters nobody is interested in paying more tax with a hope of getting extra public services. This is the mentality that is keeping Labour out of power for a long time. People are happy to pay current level of tax and they expect more bang for their buck. Labour is looking like a tired old party when they come up with the same idea – “Let us tax and spend”.

          • greywarshark 5.1.1.3.2
            20 February 2016 at 10:19 am

            Hi upnorth
            Do you mean – made up cliches rather than cliques?
            Your break up of the voters for each party seems pretty right.

            There have been some excellent analyses lately that sum up why NZ still vote for Gnats and Labour sits at the edge waiting to be asked to dance. I think I’ll read back and see if I can find the one I am thinking of, and keep it before us. Otherwise we are just going round in a whirlpool of words and the nuggets of insight get lost.

            By the way why should a senior college debate level be a bad thing? I would have thought that some good thinking points would be raised there.
            edited

            • greywarshark 5.1.1.3.2.1
              20 February 2016 at 3:17 pm

              I think that this para from Chris Trotter gives a pretty good cover of the feeling in the NZ electorates at present.
              http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.co.nz/2016/02/flagging-our-opposition.html

              In other words, Mr Key may have got on a great many of the public’s nerves, but on its all-important hip-pocket nerve he has not got. The economy is still growing (albeit slowly) unemployment is falling, and inflation is as low as most people can remember. Wage rises may be low and infrequent – but, when they are given, they are real.

              And if you’re one of those voters lucky enough to have both feet on the property ladder, then the “wealth effect” of constantly rising house prices is unlikely to recommend any other party (except Act) for your serious electoral consideration.</blockquote

    • ngatimozart 5.2
      20 February 2016 at 1:06 pm

      You telling 48% of the electorate to Foxtrot Oscar just has alienated them and they will not forget it. The big problem with the left is it believes that it knows better than the average voter and I saw that arrogance after the last election. Comments like “… the voters are idiots after we showed them all the reasons why …..”. “It’s the voters fault why we didn’t win especially after we showed them the proof from Snowden etc”. I saw all that and similar as comments on blogs and social media. The message should be that it is your fault, not the voters, that you failed. Blaming the voters for your losing an election because they, the voter, was to dumb to get your message is the height of arrogance.

      It is that and the fact that the Labour Party had forgotten its roots and the reason d’ etre for its existence that has driven people away from it. Now it is perceived as being run by special internet groups and has lost touch with reality. I for one would have to agree with that. It and the left are no longer the political groupings that are for the common working bod. Now they are populated by yuppies and activists with their pet interests that do not necessarily reflect or represent the real world. That is what has driven myself and others away. We are absolutely sick of the hate politics and negatively that has been enamenating from the left for the last five or so years. All it does is belittle you individually and collectively driving away those swing voters in the centre who can make or break an election victory. That’s my 1c worth.

      • b waghorn 5.2.1
        20 February 2016 at 9:11 pm

        I am not the left , I am just a dude who sees a corrupt outfit running nz and am over apologizing for peoples reasons for not kicking the fuckers to the curb. At this stage I’ll take weakened labour and any coalition they can cobble together.
        If you truly care you will to??

      • greywarshark 5.2.2
        21 February 2016 at 2:45 pm

        ngatimozart
        I see your point of view clearly and the rationale. But there is always more than one viewpoint to anything. It would be a good idea for you to take a contrarian view as an exercise and look at those other viewpoints as to why people didn’t vote for Labour.
        Nothing is as simple as a person would wish. Then you would really be wise, and you might still stick to your viewpoint but with extra understanding.

        We on this blog talk and argue and try to understand all aspects of every discussion. Often someone will belittle those who just strike an attitude and won’t see anybody else’s, won’t look at the reality on the ground, in the middle class, and up on Cloud 9. It seems we can’t move the wealthy and powerful by emotion, reason etc. and try to demonstrate how foolish and plain evil they are in the long run, try to make them uncomfortable, but they have a powerful propaganda machine of sycophants that find it pays to play the anti-left, anti-progressive party’s game.

    • The Gormless Fool formerly known as Oleolebiscuitbarrell 5.3
      20 February 2016 at 4:43 pm

      “Get fucked, Kiwis” could be Labour’s slogan at the next election.

  6. Sanctuary 6
    20 February 2016 at 6:30 am

    What a sad country. The media is dominated by a crushing groupthink of gloating middle class right wingers, and it shows. New Zealand has never been collectively so stupid. And it is only going to get worse.

  7. chris73 7
    20 February 2016 at 7:09 am

    Is anybody really surprised by this? The dildo incident alone, Waitangi and not to mention Labours bob each way over the TPPA, I’m quite frankly surprised its as close as it is

  8. pat 8
    20 February 2016 at 7:42 am

    “It’s the economy stupid”

    Always was, always will be….the right will gloat about the Nats 48.5%, ( that shows how finely balanced it is) as the narrative about how “popular” they are is vital, when they lose that it will be all downhill from there……no effort will be spared to keep promoting that line

    My pick is they will be gone at the next election as by then the flow ons will be hitting the back pocket……then we have the massive task of unpicking the culture of corruption they have instilled in this country…..that is the biggest challenge

    • chris73 8.1
      20 February 2016 at 7:51 am

      If you look at the results since the last election you’ll see theres been no real change, National still roughly where it was, Lab/Grns still roughly where it was

      The people of NZ will eventually vote National out but not until John Key wins a fourth election

      • pat 8.1.1
        20 February 2016 at 7:54 am

        he’ll have to bloody lucky to get his timing right because once the slide starts it’ll happen bloody quick

        • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 7:55 am

          Hence I think the next election will be in 18 months or less.

          • Sacha 8.1.1.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 10:36 am

            And one party will still be sitting on its chuff, keeping its powder dry – cos that worked so well the last couple of times.

            • Colonial Viper 8.1.1.1.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 12:21 pm

              They’re like the like the British Redcoats, firing in an orderly, sequential and totally predictable manner, exactly like you would do during the 19th Century.

              Just doesn’t work in the modern day.

          • Jones 8.1.1.1.2
            21 February 2016 at 6:52 pm

            Agreed pat & CV… what is happening with global economy is going to have huge impact on the next election.

        • UncookedSelachimorpha 8.1.1.2
          20 February 2016 at 12:35 pm

          I hope so!!

      • Mosa 8.1.2
        21 February 2016 at 1:19 pm

        Oh god another 3 year hangover.
        I am feeling queasy at the thought.
        Its like the mother in law has moved in permently and won’t take the hint!

    • Colonial Viper 8.2
      20 February 2016 at 7:54 am

      I’ve said this before, and although commentators on The Standard whose opinion I respect have understandably disagreed, I am sticking with it:

      We are in a Political Economic Inverse at the moment.

      Yes, it remains “It’s the Economy, Stupid.”

      But not as usual.

      The weaker the economy gets and the scarier the global financial situation looks, the more people will stick even harder with National, and the more they will be scared off the inexperienced economic team leading Labour.

      • pat 8.2.1
        20 February 2016 at 7:59 am

        only those that traditionally vote National (or further right)…it is that critical swing voter that holds the key (excuse the pun)….they will drop Key when they are hurting or feel threatened…..everything else will be overlooked, justified if they are making money….once that is at risk all other factors come into play for them.

        • Colonial Viper 8.2.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 8:06 am

          I believe you are expressing the conventional interpretation of “It’s the Economy, Stupid” where it is the incumbent who gets hurt by an economic downturn. That’s definitely how it tends to happen.

          But I think ‘adverseness to loss’ is going to take over in that middle class swing voter group and I reckon National is going to exploit that:

          That is – “you think things look bad for your household income right now? Wait until that inexperienced Labour bunch get in, that’ll really fuck things.”

          The party which is most perceived as the economic ‘safe pair of hands’ will win.

          • pat 8.2.1.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 8:39 am

            it is conventional for a reason….think you under-estimate the size and breadth of that swing cohort….and National has almost all of it currently (IMO)

          • Ben 8.2.1.1.2
            20 February 2016 at 9:25 am

            So you are basically saying that Labour is stuffed. In a strong economy it is a lot harder to displace the incumbent, and in a weakening economy the propect of a Left govt is easily shown to be high risk. I believe it differs when a Left govt is in charge of a poor economy as the opposition can simply make the right noises about sorting it out. Does this therefore (if you believe it of course) put the left at a disadvantage?

            As Redbaiter has pointed out – jobs, jobs, jobs is crucial to the mindset of the public. If the majority of people are happy and see good prospects, no amount of good policy will get them to risk changing the status quo. I recall a post here where someone was hoping that the economy would go south so that people would start to hurt and vote Labour. Although it was shot down by a couple of regulars (Gosh! You can’t say that out loud), it seemed to me to be the underlying/unsaid hope for many on this site.

            Into election year, watch the Nats crank up their attacks on Little if he is still around. He is vunerable to being tagged as a union man, and will struggle to keep himself in control in front of the media when the blowtorch is really turned on him. At present they are letting Little do his own damage to see what happens. He is holding his ground, but needs to do more than that to make an impact.

            • Colonial Viper 8.2.1.1.2.1
              20 February 2016 at 11:23 am

              Does this therefore (if you believe it of course) put the left at a disadvantage?

              it does IMO, because the Left have in the last 20 years given up on promoting their own economic frameworks, in favour of saying that they can run the neoliberal market dominant framework a bit better than the neoliberals.

              Some days you even get Labour supporters proclaiming that they can be better orthodox economists: that they would do better at getting a surplus, that they would do better at getting free trade deals, etc.

              Into election year, watch the Nats crank up their attacks on Little if he is still around. He is vunerable to being tagged as a union man

              They will do this but I think there will also be a focus will on his inexperience and the inexperience of his Finance spokesperson, Grant Robertson.

          • Reddelusion 8.2.1.1.3
            20 February 2016 at 11:13 am

            Your right cv jk is popular with majority of nz however bill English has respect right across the board, left and right

            • Colonial Viper 8.2.1.1.3.1
              20 February 2016 at 11:44 am

              Simple question for both Left and Right:

              Who will NZers trust more to properly manage the effects of the next global financial crisis?

              Bill English or Grant Robertson?

              • Matthew Hooton …
                20 February 2016 at 1:00 pm

                If those are the only options, then Bill English. Overwhelmingly.

              • Stuart Munro …
                21 February 2016 at 9:45 am

                I’ve no interest in Grant Robertson – but a developmentalist will always outperform a Friedmanite.

                If Bill stands on his record not even his mum would vote for him.

            • marty mars 8.2.1.1.3.2
              20 February 2016 at 12:26 pm

              english does not have broad support or respect – sorry that meme is wrong imo.

          • savenz 8.2.1.1.4
            21 February 2016 at 10:49 am

            @CV – you are right!

            Although above all that people can be persuaded by ideology (for collective good).

            i.e. Think of the children and the next generation and the planet. But you need to have someone with integrity and passion to sell it. Sanders and Corbyn have the integrity but no one springs to mind currently in the NZ parliament.

            Or sovereignty. Think Nuclear Free NZ and TPP. Those are issues Kiwis are very emotional on and care about. Again you need a leader who is passionate and persuasive. NOT we have 5 bottom lines, corporate power point style, but so many holes that it makes everyone hate you!

            And talking about the lies the Natz have told aka Winston being popular. He loves to catch out the Natz aka – the fishing bet – and make them look stupid. Voters love it!

            So the opposition needs to have a plan for the economy AND an X factor and a collaboration!

            I also think capital gains is a loser for the opposition, Kiwis love property from Maori to the middle classes and beyond. However by adding in residency for 6 years before owning property or having to pay a tax on it, most Kiwis unaffected and will quell offshore owners. This could also help the Greens too!

            Showing what a crap job the Natz have done will help on the economy. 2.8 billion in debt is not a winner for voters! Also collecting proper taxes from companies and campaigning on that would help rather than hard working Kiwis!

            And keeping it simple – not some sort of fine print, law degree or nondescript feel good rubbish everyone hates now from politicians! Clear messaging with a real policy!

        • BM 8.2.1.2
          20 February 2016 at 8:07 am

          Only if Labour can demonstrate that what National has done/not done is the reason these swing voters are in financial trouble.

          • pat 8.2.1.2.1
            20 February 2016 at 8:26 am

            you can espouse/believe that if you wish….me, I think that is irrelevant bollocks

            • BM 8.2.1.2.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 9:53 am

              So you think the voters are that dense and child like that they’ll automatically blame National for their financial predicament and run in to the arms of Labour?

              • pat …
                20 February 2016 at 10:09 am

                “blame” has nothing to do with it…..it is change that is the driver

                • BM …
                  20 February 2016 at 10:10 am

                  Change to what?

                  • pat …
                    20 February 2016 at 10:18 am

                    change from (not to)….the status quo..would have thought that self evident

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      20 February 2016 at 11:45 am

                      This is the conventional idea that what Labour has to do is wait for the electoral tide to turn against National.

                      I reckon that could happen 2020/2023.

                    • pat …
                      20 February 2016 at 11:57 am

                      dont propose that that is all Labour have to do, it is of no use to anyone if a Labour led coalition end up being a one term government….as previously stated there is a legacy of corruption that will need attending to and that will take time…policy change is easy…culture change not so

      • maui 8.2.2
        20 February 2016 at 9:48 am

        +100, I fear that people will hold onto National for grim life if the economy turns shit. The public after all think they got us through the 2008 meltdown, and they will leverage that fear through their owned media too.

        • Colonial Viper 8.2.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 11:46 am

          this is exactly the dynamic I see happening.

          Fearful white-knuckled middle class voters holding on for their financial life will stick with what they know.

      • Chuck 8.2.3
        21 February 2016 at 8:00 pm

        Spot on CV, the voting public will stick with the experienced and steady as she goes National govt. Everyone knows for Labour to form a government will require Greens and NZF to work together and continue to do so…which even if Winston holds hands with the Greens (which is a huge question mark in it self) it will be unstable and end up in tears. Labour needs to hit 40% + and then they can choose either the Greens or NZF to have any chance in 2017. And the chance of Labour getting anywhere near 40% is zero…but they can rebuild and aim for 2020.

    • dv 8.3
      20 February 2016 at 8:09 am

      “It’s the economy stupid”

      Always was, always will be…

      Current debt NZ$ 118,583,029,345
      Interest 5,722,367,470

      2030 – 0.7% increase in GDP, – 2.7 billion from TPPA

      Predicted debt in 2030 $252 billion

      Interest 12 billion

      • pat 8.3.1
        20 February 2016 at 8:13 am

        is when the effects of those macro indicators reveal themselves at a personal level….thats why timing for Key is critical…it is entirely possible we will see an early election (on that I agree with CV)

        • Nic the NZer 8.3.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 10:39 am

          “When the effects of these macro indicators reveal themselves”
          They already are in full. What further effects are expected due to govt debt? When nothing eventuates you will have to accept my point that nz govt debt is totally irrelevant to the situation.

            • Nic the NZer 8.3.1.1.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 12:13 pm

              So which of those examples has floating exchange rates and default in local currency debt? I suggest none is to be found.

              But that does answer my question. If the government defaults then yes i expect them to be voted out of office.

              • pat …
                20 February 2016 at 12:25 pm

                sigh…weve been through this…your faith in the ability of floating exchange rates is grossly overstated….how long does it take to reposition the basis of an economy when significant currency impacts occur?particularly one based on agriculture…flaoting exchange rates work fine when they fluctuate within a relatively narrow band….retraining, reinvesting, entering new markets all take time and then you still have to grow those new fields and take time to reap the return….. and in the meantime?
                and they don’t relieve the impact a continuously negative trade position although theoretically they are supposed to, like any market they are seldom in touch with reality.

                • Nic the NZer …
                  20 February 2016 at 12:34 pm

                  Floating exchange rates also mean there is no fixed exchange rate to default on. Which is all i expect them to do.

                • Nic the NZer …
                  20 February 2016 at 1:53 pm

                  Though,
                  “How long does it take to reposition the basis for the economy when significant currency impacts occur”,

                  Maybe the point is the exchange rate is not particularly important to the NZ economy?

                  It doesnt drive inflation much (despite what your theoretical models say) and the real economy actually doesnt respond to foreign exchange rates much. As you say “like any market they are seldom in touch with reality” so if the market is seldom in touch with reality why should we worry about their concernes over the concerns of left wing potential labour voters?

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    20 February 2016 at 5:26 pm

                    Maybe the point is the exchange rate is not particularly important to the NZ economy?

                    In the last ten years the NZD has fluctuated between about .50USD to about .87USD.

                    NZ is now so afraid of actually actively managing its macro-economy that we’ve somehow decided that the safest course is to let ourselves be tossed around like a cork on the global seas.

                    In which case, I wonder why we actually need all these politicians, Reserve Bank, types because as far as I can see they put the markets in charge and do fuck all that is useful to earn their pay.

      • Colonial Viper 8.3.2
        20 February 2016 at 8:13 am

        Not sure what you are talking about there dv. English has gladly accumulated more debt in order to keep the Government spending into the economy and into households.

        Are you against that? Is an austerity situation better where the Government takes more out of the economy than it puts in? (That’s how a Government makes a surplus for itself after all, it has to force the private sector including your and my household, into a deficit).

        Coming into an early election in 2017, I believe English is going to keep spending into the economy and into households.

        • pat 8.3.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 8:22 am

          they are like Canute…of course they will attempt to hold back the tide and set policy to avoid the impacts from that critical cohort, irrespective of the long term impacts for the wellbeing of the country….but like Canute they can’t fight the forces of nature forever

          • te reo putake 8.3.2.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 8:35 am

            Poor old Canute, still being misrepresented centuries later! Just for clarity, pat, Canute was successful in his tidal demonstration. He actually proved his point.

            I kid you not, look it up.

            • David H 8.3.2.1.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 9:45 am

              Yep they thought he was sort of a god and he proved them wrong…

              • Halfcrown …
                20 February 2016 at 11:37 am

                “Yep they thought he was sort of a god and he proved them wrong…”

                You are not talking about Key are you?

            • pat 8.3.2.1.1.2
              20 February 2016 at 10:07 am

              I have….indeed he proved his point and that was as follows…
              ‘ Huntingdon’s account, Canute set his throne by the sea shore and commanded the incoming tide to halt and not wet his feet and robes. Yet “continuing to rise as usual [the tide] dashed over his feet and legs without respect to his royal person. Then the king leapt backwards, saying: ‘Let all men know how empty and worthless is the power of kings, for there is none worthy of the name, but He whom heaven, earth, and sea obey by eternal laws.'” He then hung his gold crown on a crucifix, and never wore it again “to the honour of God the almighty King”.[2]”

              wheres the misrepresentation?

              Suspect you have misunderstood…national will attempt to stop the impacts of the economic situation and they will be unsuccessful …as was Canute with the tide.

        • dv 8.3.2.2
          20 February 2016 at 8:54 am

          May be so CV
          But the tax cuts didn’t help
          SFC
          Rio
          etc didn’t help also

          26m on flag
          These are hardly austerity.

          And the TPPA benefits are marginal.

          • Nic the NZer 8.3.2.2.1
            20 February 2016 at 10:31 am

            Your kidding right?
            SCF, Rio etc directly contributed to real peoples balance sheets. Especially where those instutions were there employers, investors or financiers for other businesses. Tax cuts also helped directly to many peoples bottom line.

            Arguably there were better uses of the same funds but all these things were a positive contribution to real peoples bottom line.

            • dv 8.3.2.2.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 10:45 am

              Nope not kidding
              See what happened to Scales corp, and how much the purchaser made.
              Rio is a person ? HUH

              Tax cuts certainly helped the wealthy

              The borrowing has to be repaid.

              Arguably there were better uses of the same funds-
              That I certainly agree with.

              • Colonial Viper …
                20 February 2016 at 11:48 am

                Rio is a person ? HUH

                All the workers at the plant and all the subcontractors and small businesses who get work and income from the plant and its workers.

              • Nic the NZer …
                20 February 2016 at 12:29 pm

                Seems you fully believe in Ricardian equivalence (look it up). Not a theory which worked out in practice in Greece practice, but its the basis for IMF policy in many cases.

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 8.3.3
        20 February 2016 at 12:44 pm

        A Sanders approach could make this look very different. The first two points from the Executive Summary of this report:

        – The growth rate of the real gross domestic product will rise from 2.1% per annum to 5.3% so that real GDP per capita will be over $20,000 higher in 2026 than is projected under the current policy

        – Faster economic growth and redistributive taxation will raise the growth rate of median income from 0.8% per annum to 3.5%, adding nearly $22,000 to median household income in 2026

        And a summary from a less Bernie-friendly news source:

        http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/08/news/economy/sanders-income-jobs/

    • Chooky 8.4
      20 February 2016 at 8:23 am

      +100 pat….and I dont believe the polls, nor do I respond to or answer them when invited …they are a selective PR exercise

      ….as Jim Bolger said “Bugger the polls”

      • chris73 8.4.1
        20 February 2016 at 8:34 am

        🙂

        • Chooky 8.4.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 8:43 am

          clarification ( to smirk) …will argue about them here…but will not respond to pollsters requests by phone or mail

          • chris73 8.4.1.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 2:55 pm

            If memory serves Chooky I’m pretty sure you said the exact same thing prior to the last election and the election results ended up being pretty close to what David Farrar was saying in the poll of polls

            But hey good luck in keeping up the morale of the troops

            • Chooky 8.4.1.1.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 6:05 pm

              just a fluke…unless Labour and the Left can rouse and inspire the missing million voters then it will be close…but imo there will be a new coalition government

              polls should be banned imo …they are an instrument of PR persuasion …and are used to lie about the direction of political parties

              http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35350419

              http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/10/former-labour-ministers-call-for-ban-on-pre-election-polls-to-be-considered

              https://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/me/mea/mec03c

              eg has jonkey nactional said they they stand for undermining New Zealanders rights, democracy, physical and mental health, state education, state housing, affordable housing for New Zealanders, foreigner take over of New Zealand housing and land, Goldman Sachs’ take over of Treasury and New Zealand state assets?

              No…

              well the polling companies and the msm are not doing what they should be doing…exposing the real agendas and asking the real questions…biased they are framing the wrong questions and they are trying to PR frame elections in favour of jonkey nact

              • chris73 …
                20 February 2016 at 6:17 pm

                How can it be a fluke when all the poll of polls leading up to the election were saying the same thing?

                Maybe Labour might rouse the so-called missing million to vote but it doesn’t mean it’ll all go to the Left

                Well of course you want them banned but only because they’re favoring the right and have done so for the last few election cycles but you might like to consider the possibility that the reason the left are doing so poorly in the polls is because the left are doing so poorly in general

                But naah find something else to blame instead

                • Chooky …
                  20 February 2016 at 6:22 pm

                  this is my point:

                  …”The problem is that opinion poll results – like almost any other form of expression – are not just the reflection of people’s views but may also shape the views of others. That is, people may be influenced in how they vote by what they have learned from an opinion poll… or what they think they have learned.”…

                  https://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/me/mea/mec03c

                  • chris73 …
                    20 February 2016 at 6:39 pm

                    Well we better not have politicians interviewed then because what they say may influence someone to vote for them

                    Stop blaming everyone else for the lefts own inadequacies and then the left might actually be able to sort itself out but it won’t if it continually tries to blame everyone and everything else

                    • Chooky …
                      20 February 2016 at 6:49 pm

                      do right wing politicians use deception to try and fit in with what the polls say the people want?

                      yes…they tell lies…what people want and what right wing politicians intend to give them are two very different things

                      this should be exposed ….the pollsters dont do this and nor does the msm

                      people dont vote ( a million of them) as a consequence

                      it is a vicious circle of PR and telling lies

                    • chris73 …
                      20 February 2016 at 7:34 pm

                      Yeah see I’d believe you if the only party that ever won was National but the fact is when Labour gets its act together and presents a legimate option for government they get or form the majority of the next government

                      Its not that hard to comprehend, present a credible alternative and people will vote for you

                    • b waghorn …
                      20 February 2016 at 7:39 pm

                      “Labour gets its act together and presents a legimate option for government ”

                      That was probably true of politics once , now not so much , national is actively destroying democracy in nz,

                    • Chuck …
                      21 February 2016 at 1:29 pm

                      I hold little hope for the left to sort them self’s out. Reading these posts you would think the Nat’s have storm troopers breaking down doors and disappearing any one who opposes them! Come up with decent polices and the right people to campaign, convince people to vote for you. Its pretty simple and straight forward.

  9. BM 9
    20 February 2016 at 7:53 am

    Surprised National isn’t higher.

    Guess no one really gives a toss about the TPPA ?

    • Colonial Viper 9.1
      20 February 2016 at 7:59 am

      Guess no one really gives a toss about the TPPA ?

      I don’t think that’s the case. But I do think:

      1) the Greens are bouncing against their absolute electoral ceiling. People like their TPP stance, but all the people who are going to support the Greens are basically already there.

      2) Labour and National are within an inch of each other on the TPP. Their close proximity to each other have not motivated anyone to change their big party preferences.

      3) Although there is no evidence of this in these numbers, I think NZF will get a slight boost (eventually) for their consistent anti-TPP posture.

      • Chooky 9.1.1
        20 February 2016 at 8:35 am

        +100 CV…Labour is very little different from nactionl in many areas …like the Republicans and Democrats, so no real Opposition party….and I have found the Greens lack lustre , and bumbling and off beam..(.i would probably party vote NZF if the elections were held tomorrow and local vote Green)

        eg Red peak flag( FAILURE!)…eg getting tough on quality of rental housing (unrealistic…lets face it people who are living in garages and cars are lucky if they get rental housing of !) eg. the reasons why NZ housing is at a crisis point ( reluctance to face up to the issue of it being bought up by foreign investors… Greens preferred to attack Labour as “crude racial profiling”

        (I would probably party vote NZF if the elections were held tomorrow and local vote Green…NZF always pulls the surprise rabbit out of the hat in Elections…and the Greens always stuff it up by making noises about supporting Nactional and shafting Labour)

      • Ad 9.1.2
        20 February 2016 at 11:31 am

        The gradual leakage of support from Labour to Green and New Zealand First is IMHO a good thing. Good for New Zealand, and good for Parliament. If we get to an election day state of Greens at 15, NZF settling at 10, and Labour at 25, we’ll have a real rejuvenation of interest in what parliament actually does, as distinct from mere day-to-day government operations.

        Oddly, my pen will hover over either Green or NZF next time.

        • Colonial Viper 9.1.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 11:49 am

          That’s definitely the direction my pen will be going.

          And I am also picking Labour at 25% again +/- 3%.

          • Tautuhi 9.1.2.1.1
            21 February 2016 at 8:41 pm

            NZF and the Greens hold the key to the next Government, if they can demonstrate they are a viable alternative with Labour its a no brainer.

            If they and Labour run around shooting each other and themselves in the feet like they did at the last Election, welcome to a 4th Term of National Government and JK our longest serving Prime Minister?

            • Colonial Viper 9.1.2.1.1.1
              21 February 2016 at 8:54 pm

              IMO the problem is that Labour still does not have a good grasp of how to work with political partners in an MMP environment, more naturally treating these other parties as weaker rivals and competitors.

      • Stuart Munro 9.1.3
        20 February 2016 at 11:34 am

        Not sure I agree about the Green’s ‘electoral ceiling’ – these arbitrary limits like the ‘natural’ rate of unemployment should be distrusted because of the ease and frequency with which they are revised post facto.

        The TPPA protest is the most significant development in NZ politics for some years – and the Greens were front and centre on it – with Hughes reclaiming ground lost to the concession on flag change process.

        Labour came late to the party, handicapped by historical baggage, and Robertson’s Children Living in Cars, while a vast improvement on their recent dilute critiques did not maximise the opportunity. He should have read the suicide stats – well over 500 per annum now – and as Amartya Sen notes a reliable and objective measure of government failure. It is no exaggeration to say that this National ‘government’ is driving hundreds of people to their deaths every year.

        There will be no fourth term for Key, and the National brand is badly damaged among their own supporters by dishonesty. But it is possible that the historical parties will be consumed by the Greens and NZ First respectively, unless they both radically improve their performance as the global depression hits.

        • Colonial Viper 9.1.3.1
          20 February 2016 at 11:51 am

          He should have read the suicide stats – well over 500 per annum now –

          And then put in a plug for voluntary euthanasia?

          There will be no fourth term for Key, and the National brand is badly damaged among their own supporters by dishonesty.

          Well I think that given a Fourth Term, Key will resign during it and annoint a successor.

  10. One Anonymous Bloke 10
    20 February 2016 at 7:56 am

    SNAFU.

  11. Gristle 11
    20 February 2016 at 8:03 am

    At the time of the TPP protests on 4th Feb commentators where saying that these protests would lock in support for National. I think Hooton was talking about a3% lift. So a 1.5% lift is less than expected. Though it still leaves a lot of work for Greens and Labour to do.

    Assuming the flag referendum is going to fail, how do you tie to a failure by National Government? I know that it has been called by Key as a free vote, but the failure should be structured to use a much of their political capital as possible

    • chris73 11.1
      20 February 2016 at 8:11 am

      The thing is though that most voters won’t see it that way. The left (or a large majority based on some of the comments round here) seem to think that a vote against the flag will somehow magically morph into a vote of no confidence in John Key and thus the Left will win the next election in a landslide

      Unfortunately for the Left it will simply end up like the asset sales protests in that the voters won’t hold it against John Key because its simply not as big a deal as the Left would like it to be

      The voters arn’t suddenly going to go “the flag turned out to be a fizzer so lets not vote National”

      Especially when (and this is probably most critical) the main option on the left for voters is Andrew Little

      • Colonial Viper 11.1.1
        20 February 2016 at 8:18 am

        I agree with you that there will be no further impact on John Key of a ‘vote against the flag change’. People don’t like the waste of money that the flag referendum represents but that effect has already been assumed by voters and built in to these poll results IMO.

        Especially as Labour supports the flag referendum so again National and Labour are within an inch of each other on this issue.

        • Keith 11.1.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 8:27 am

          Andrew Little wasn’t voting in the flag referendum and other senior Labour figures derided it so i dont quite get that Labour support it!

          • Colonial Viper 11.1.1.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 12:16 pm

            Labour wanted a modified flag referendum and also wanted red peak included as a choice.

      • Keith 11.1.2
        20 February 2016 at 8:24 am

        So Chris73, sticking with the corrupt status quo is the clever thing to do is it?

  12. te reo putake 12
    20 February 2016 at 8:27 am

    Oddly enough, this is actually a reasonable result for the opposition parties. Government vs Oppo is 50/47.5. A one percent drop for the Nats is the end of the line for Key, as can be seen in the previous results:

    http://www.roymorgan.com/morganpoll/new-zealand/government-v-opposition

    MMP requires coalitions. Labour/Greens/NZF remains a reasonably likely prospect. Post Ratana, I believe it’s far less likely that the Maori party (if they survive) will support National. If that’s the case, even on this result, Key is gone.

    • chris73 12.1
      20 February 2016 at 8:33 am

      🙂

    • mlpc 12.2
      20 February 2016 at 8:35 am

      Serious question: do you really think Labour/Greens/NZF is a workable coalition?

      • Chooky 12.2.1
        20 February 2016 at 8:51 am

        yes…NZF has worked well with Labour in the past and the Greens will fit in ( despite threatening otherwise and shooting themselves in the mouth)

        • weka 12.2.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 11:02 am

          “yes…NZF has worked well with Labour in the past and the Greens will fit in ( despite threatening otherwise and shooting themselves in the mouth)”

          Great, someone else I have to pull up on smeary lies about the GP. Link or it didn’t happen.

      • te reo putake 12.2.2
        20 February 2016 at 8:54 am

        Yep! There is a surprising amount of cooperation behind the scenes. It’s not like it was a decade and a half ago when Winston regarded the Greens as unsuitable to work alongside.

        • Skinny 12.2.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 10:01 am

          Yes and openly when the occasions arise. The Northland by election result sent a clear message of that.

          Anyone wanting a change of Government next year and in a position to run events that require the presence of opposition political party MP’s ‘must always extend an invite to the 3 main players’ mindful of the respective party’s positions of course, to avoid having a crack at each other. The more the 3 are seen working together constructively builds confidence from the public and counters the snake oil put out from Crosby Textor and Hooton types.

      • lprent 12.2.3
        20 February 2016 at 8:56 am

        Yes.

        Sure the inherent conflict between the social conservatism and the social liberalism of NZF and the Greens will grate. But the economic basis of self sufficiency and localism of those same parties is a match made in politics.

        When I am listening to supporters, I often think I am listening to different generations saying the same thing.

        • Ad 12.2.3.1
          20 February 2016 at 10:03 am

          Nicely said there.

          I also hear different kinds of language across generations saying the same thing.
          A coalition against National won’t be easy internally, but it won’t be that hard either.

      • Grantoc 12.2.4
        20 February 2016 at 2:52 pm

        No.

        Its hard to see NZF working co operatively as a minor party in such a coalition. In addition Peter’s ego means that he’ll struggle playing second fiddle to Little and especially to Shaw.

        His ego will drive him to be to want to be ‘top dog’ – driven by his own perceived sense of self importance and of being a senior statesman in the NZ parliament, as well as a sense of entitlement.

        If a coalition made up of Labour/Green/NZF is formed it will be inherently very unstable and unlikely to last.

        • b waghorn 12.2.4.1
          20 February 2016 at 3:11 pm

          I’d offer him the speakers role. Always good to get the poacher to be your game keeper.

          • Grantoc 12.2.4.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 8:45 pm

            Winston for speaker? An interesting thought.

            Not sure if he would agree to this though because it sidelines him.

            Winston will want real power in what is likely to be his swan song in NZ politics. Just not sure if being speaker will cut it with him, if he gets that opportunity.

            Complicating matters is that in a centre right coalition, he’d be the second biggest party and would therefore have greater negotiating power, meaning that he’s more likely to get closer to what he really wants. Given how they’re currently tracking in the polls, NZF would only be the third largest party in a coalition of the centre left – that has to be less attractive to Peters.

            • b waghorn 12.2.4.1.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 9:04 pm

              O come on winnys long ago worked out he can’t get a top job.
              He’d be an awesome speaker , no shit will be taken but heaps would be given
              To fools who try it on.

              • Grantoc …
                20 February 2016 at 9:56 pm

                How do you know that Peter’s accepts that he won’t get a ‘top job’. Are you his psychotherapist?

                He may be an awesome speaker; but you are fantasying if you think this is what he’d accept.

                Like all successful politicians he’s motivated by power. And he’ll play the power game long before he goes near consolation prizes such as becoming speaker.

                In my opinion the dynamics are such that he’ll be able to play power politics with the nats a lot more easily than with L/G’s.

                • b waghorn …
                  20 February 2016 at 10:27 pm

                  When I was about 18 Winny lined up in the opposing team at my clubs new ground opening, to do the kick off.
                  Now if he was an arrogant dreamer he would of stayed on the the field for longer than the minute he did, but his astute nose for trouble told him that their where fifteen young munters over there that all wanted to scelp a politician. I have little time for him but I respect him.

            • Tautuhi 12.2.4.1.1.2
              21 February 2016 at 5:49 am

              I think NZF will poll higher than the Greens in the 2017 Election.

          • Chuck 12.2.4.1.2
            21 February 2016 at 1:35 pm

            Snow ball chance in hell for Peters to accept speakers role. Why? way too much work for Winston…much easier to be a minister with a office full of support staff.

      • Keith 12.2.5
        20 February 2016 at 3:00 pm

        Worked last time without issue!

    • Anne 12.3
      20 February 2016 at 9:00 am

      Not a bad result in my book either.

      Right of Centre = 48.5

      Left of Centre = 47. 5

      Only 1% in it which is so far within the margin of error they might as well be equal.

      Forget the Maori Party – they’re gone next time around and its all their own fault.
      Forget Dunne – he’s a joke and not even those idiots in the Ohuria electorate who have voted for him can ignore it this time.
      Act is a spent force with 1 Nat MP masquerading as something else.

      • Stuart Munro 12.3.1
        20 February 2016 at 11:46 am

        While I think it will be a long time before ACT break 1% again, Seymour is playing a long game, and strategic applications of common sense like his objection to the leaking of the Bain report do him no harm. I expect he is positioning himself to be the conspicuous winner on the right when the Key government succumbs to its burden of negative karma. We have not seen the last of them, though their ability to create a following or coopt a movement at this stage looks doubtful.

      • Magisterium 12.3.2
        20 February 2016 at 12:01 pm

        It’s more like

        Centre = 48.5
        Right + Far Right = fuck all
        Left + Far Left = 47.5

        Anyone who thinks that National is anywhere on the Right-hand end of the scale has lost touch with reality.

        • Anne 12.3.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 12:21 pm

          Right of centre covers.. centre through to the far Right.
          Left of centre covers .. centre through to the far Left.
          The so-called centre, as defined by neo-liberalsim and their right wing allies in government and the MSM, is NOT the true political centre. It is part of the moderate Right block so comes in the 48.5% figure.

          I presume you were born around 1980 and therefore have no comprehension of political history, or you are trying to re-write common understanding in an effort to distort reality.

          • Magisterium 12.3.2.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 1:06 pm

            Look I just post what my Crosby-Textor handlers tell me to post, I don’t know what any of the words mean.

          • Matthew Hooton 12.3.2.1.2
            20 February 2016 at 7:19 pm

            To be clear here, Anne, are you saying people aged 36 or younger are, by virtue of that, unable to comprehend political history? Because that is a pretty arrogant belief to have.

            • Anne 12.3.2.1.2.1
              20 February 2016 at 8:59 pm

              One of the more arrogant and bully-boy commentators in NZ accuses someone else of arrogance. I directed my comment to one individual. And in fairness to him/her the reposte was very good and I appreciated it. One-nil to Magisterium.

      • chris73 12.3.3
        20 February 2016 at 4:01 pm

        You made a slight mistake so I fixed it for you

        Right of Centre = 48.5
        Left of Centre = 41. 5
        NZfirst = 6

        • Anne 12.3.3.1
          20 February 2016 at 7:12 pm

          Nope. There’s no way Winston Peters will go with the Nats with Key in charge. He fitted in well with the last Labour led govt. and he knows it can happen again.

          • Chooky 12.3.3.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 7:32 pm

            +100 Anne

          • Chuck 12.3.3.1.2
            21 February 2016 at 1:47 pm

            Good to know you have Winston Peters ear Anne. Cast your mind back to “he fitted in well with the last Labour led govt” what happened to the Greens? (hint they were shafted) this time around Labour will need BOTH the Greens and NZF to have a chance of forming the next govt. Winston will do whats best for himself, and as this could be his last election he will want it to shape his legacy. Which is why its less than 50% chance he will concede to the Greens holding more power in the next govt then he does. I.E. he will go with National (if the Nats need him).

        • Skinny 12.3.3.2
          20 February 2016 at 8:37 pm

          Your assuming things there.

          Plenty of senior members of ACT see Labour as the better party to be in government with. I nearly choked when one told me in person. I also laughed when he invited to come to one of their inter circle meetings. I thought he was taking the piss but he was serious, he liked my skills, on that will take it as a compliment.

      • Tautuhi 12.3.4
        21 February 2016 at 5:51 am

        ACT will be a spent force next Election?

        Neoliberalism has been a failed experiment worldwide?

    • marty mars 12.4
      20 February 2016 at 9:29 am

      I agree trp. The gnats hold power, push the memes, attempt to destroy naysayers through dirty politics, turn key into a dancing monKey for the cameras, send their minions around the net to poison the blog-wells and all the other things they do CONTINUOUSLY and yet, here we are. At this stage of the electoral cycle things are looking okay.

  13. mlpc 13
    20 February 2016 at 8:30 am

    Labour’s problem is Andrew Little.

    His stance on the TPPA – let’s not go in, but if we do go in lets not come out – is untenable and will make him easy meat for Key.

    He is vulnerable to being ridiculed as a big time electoral loser (New Plymouth).

    And he comes across as being so glum the whole time.

    Labour needs a leader who is much more politically skilful, and who has popular appeal.

    Next! Oh, hello Mrs King!

  14. ABC 14
    20 February 2016 at 9:38 am

    I find it interesting that:
    1) We don’t hear how popular our Prime minister is in recent polls.
    2) No one mentions the number of people that did not want to name a party:
    “Of all electors surveyed 7% (up 0.5%) didn’t name a party.”

  15. Paul 15
    20 February 2016 at 9:56 am

    CV…..

    1. Do you actually want to see the end of this government?
    2. Do you notice your incessant attacks on the Labour Party are gleefully picked up on by the right wing trolls on this site?
    3. Do you feel your stance is helping to get rid of this government?

    • Ben 15.1
      20 February 2016 at 10:38 am

      4: Do you think this blog has any bearing on who will form the next Govt?

    • Sanctuary 15.2
      20 February 2016 at 10:42 am

      CV has an ego problem. He lost in a parish pump stoush in a tiny electorate at the arse end of a country at the very edge of the intellectual and actual world. The correct response to that loss should have been to write it off as a minor life experience in the great scheme of left wing life. Instead, his ego has refused to let it go, and in doing so he reveals himself as a uninformed parochial hick more interested in winning a hillbilly feud than furthing the cause he nominally ascribes to. I expect he will end up in ACT, the usual final port of call of those whose ego exceeds their ability.

    • Colonial Viper 15.3
      20 February 2016 at 10:08 pm

      Paul:

      CV…..

      1. Do you actually want to see the end of this government?
      2. Do you notice your incessant attacks on the Labour Party are gleefully picked up on by the right wing trolls on this site?
      3. Do you feel your stance is helping to get rid of this government?

      Labour is the huge dead old Kauri blocking out sunlight and new growth from beneath it.

      It will fall sooner or later, but sooner would be better.

      In terms of “helping to get rid of this government” maybe you should ask Labour if they are any good at this – and they receive millions of dollars of taxpayers money a year to do this as a full time job.

      • Paul 15.3.1
        20 February 2016 at 10:15 pm

        I appreciate that.
        But is attacking the Labour Party the solution to getting rid of Key?

        • Colonial Viper 15.3.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 10:19 pm

          “Getting rid of John Key” is the wrong question IMO

          The Left has a habit of asking the wrong questions

          How about: “What does NZ need in a PM today, and who in Parliament can deliver on it?”

          • marty mars 15.3.1.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 10:26 pm

            lol is it the wrong question or the answer just isn’t one you want to give. But the change in question shouts very clearly. Which side is your bread buttered on?

          • Stuart Munro 15.3.1.1.2
            21 February 2016 at 9:52 am

            Nope. Cunliffe would have done a much better job than Key – but he couldn’t get through the MSM and his own cabinet.

            The comprehensive economic failure of the Key/English kleptocracy needs to be publicly problematised or a government with the capacity to solve it will not be selected.

        • weka 15.3.1.2
          20 February 2016 at 10:55 pm

          “But is attacking the Labour Party the solution to getting rid of Key?”

          I get the impression that CV would be happier with a Key 4th term than for Labour to win next time without having changed much.

          • Colonial Viper 15.3.1.2.1
            20 February 2016 at 11:02 pm

            it’s somewhat academic a discussion as I don’t feel like there’s much chance of the latter scenario.

      • marty mars 15.3.2
        20 February 2016 at 10:33 pm

        “Labour is the huge dead old Kauri blocking out sunlight and new growth from beneath it.

        It will fall sooner or later, but sooner would be better.”

        Hey colon – it isn’t dead yet, you need to keep trying to chop it with your chainsaw of righteousness so it falls as soon as possible and empowers your gnat mates – what a right wing joke you’ve become – wonder how the savecv bullshit would go now – like a bucket of sick I’d say.

        • Colonial Viper 15.3.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 10:39 pm

          of course it’s already dead.

          • marty mars 15.3.2.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 10:42 pm

            Wow – when did it die? Was it while you were there apparently trying to be in the team.

            • Colonial Viper 15.3.2.1.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 10:51 pm

              MM, in the 1980s.

            • Colonial Viper 15.3.2.1.1.2
              20 February 2016 at 10:53 pm

              Good on you for being a Labour Establishment Loyalist, MM, but I’m over being an apologist for their performance and their politics.

              • marty mars …
                20 February 2016 at 11:02 pm

                I have never been a labour person especially after the Foreshore and seabed rubbish – I’ve been fighting against the bullshit while you were still wiping your arse with your hand.

                yet even with all of the labour bullshit I can still see good people in there who believe in good things and the alternative is so much worse – I’ve come to see that now – with you I see a very hurt ex-candidate acting like he DESERVES something – so he wants to ‘tear it down’ and start again – I think you’re just a doomer with hurt pride and a grudge.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  20 February 2016 at 11:12 pm

                  you’re a Labour apologist who cannot see a failing unelectable neoliberal party of the past which today is only an inch separated from National chasing the votes of the top 10% comfortable middle class.

                  BTW I did understand that standing in Deepest Bluest Southland against Deputy PM English wasn’t going to be a winner.

        • Colonial Viper 15.3.2.2
          20 February 2016 at 10:49 pm

          “wonder how the savecv bullshit would go now – like a bucket of sick I’d say.”

          Remind me, save CV from what? Oh yes an out of control, vindictive member of the Labour caucus. Whom Labour has kept on.

          • marty mars 15.3.2.2.1
            20 February 2016 at 10:54 pm

            “an out of control, vindictive member” – That’s fucken you mate!!! You have become what you once opposed, what you once rallied against and fought against and it is now you – doesn’t that bother you even slightly?

            • Colonial Viper 15.3.2.2.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 10:59 pm

              no I’m just a private citizen speaking his mind mate, I’m not an MP getting $160K pa as a representative of the people.

              • marty mars …
                20 February 2016 at 11:04 pm

                how many private citizens are ex-candidates and ex branch committee members?

                • Colonial Viper …
                  20 February 2016 at 11:14 pm

                  how many private citizens are former Labour supporters and members who will never ever vote Labour again. I’m guessing around a quarter million. I’m one of them.

                  • marty mars …
                    20 February 2016 at 11:22 pm

                    well so be it – at least you admit you don’t give a fuck anymore so the pretending is over – mind you I did always suspect it was pretending anyway what with your views on ‘other’ matters.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      20 February 2016 at 11:41 pm

                      Hey MM, you really are a Sherlock Holmes for figuring out that I consider Labour not just unfit for purpose, but utterly dead in the water.

                      Where did you cultivate your abilities to read between the lines?

                    • marty mars …
                      21 February 2016 at 12:26 am

                      I’m a professional – it’s what I do and I do it a lot with work.

                      I wish you happiness and peace.

  16. Ad 16
    20 February 2016 at 10:13 am

    The thing I think Labour can do is keep regularly looking coherent, with policies that are solid. They are doing that. I don’t think of them as a high-30s party anymore. Going hard left on anything won’t help. That’s what we have the Greens for. If Labour find 30% at election day they will be doing fine.

    Other than that, I think the economy and the society, rather than parties, matter more to voters.

    As the Savation Army State of the Nation report showed this week, some things like teenage pregnancy and crime rates really are improving, but others like child poverty continue to get worse.

    As the labour market stats are showing us, unemployment at just over 5% is pretty good at the moment, but the wage growth is terrible and a lot of people are simply retiring as soon as they can.

    Personally I don’t like this government, because they are lazy, and because they spend their money in the wrong areas. (See Gordon Campbell’s piece yesterday on Defence V Health expenditure).

    I think there will only be a strong momentum to change this government when the unemployment rate goes pretty high, or some astonishing exterior economic collapse.

    People are now so used to expecting so little from government these days that politics has receded a long way from popular discourse.

    • BM 16.1
      20 February 2016 at 10:36 am

      People are now so used to expecting so little from government these days that politics has receded a long way from popular discourse.

      Translation:

      People prefer government to be hands off and stay out of their lives.

      They want government to just run the country not micro manage them like left wing governments try and do.

      • Paul 16.1.1
        20 February 2016 at 10:41 am

        No, it means thirty years of neo-liberalism has destroyed their confidence in government. The betrayal of the people of NZ by Lange’s government was pivotal in this.

        People don’t share your libertarian ideology.
        Under 1% vote for ACT.

        • Reddelusion 16.1.1.1
          20 February 2016 at 11:24 am

          Oh how we miss the richness of life and choice in nz pre 80s in our little closed going broke economy

          • Paul 16.1.1.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 11:27 am

            The poor did better then

          • Stuart Munro 16.1.1.1.2
            20 February 2016 at 11:50 am

            It is still small, closed and going broke – but you could reliably find a job and buy a house then.

          • Halfcrown 16.1.1.1.3
            20 February 2016 at 11:51 am

            “Oh how we miss the richness of life and choice in nz pre 80s in our little closed going broke economy”

            As opposed to our richness of life and choice in nz open to every spiv going broke economy”

          • Paul 16.1.1.1.4
            20 February 2016 at 10:16 pm

            We actually owned our own country then.

      • Ad 16.1.2
        20 February 2016 at 11:21 am

        No, it’s simply a Right Direction – Wrong Direction poll.

        Plenty of people still want activist government – this one is at least as activist as the last one.

        Hell, the economic nationalism, isolationism, and populism of Sanders, Corbyn, and Trump are pretty close to interchangeable.

        And this particular government has really understood that much of the future of structural engagement is with cities. They really get Auckland, and they really get Christchurch, now.

    • Sanctuary 16.2
      20 February 2016 at 10:56 am

      Looking at NZ from a distance, it seems to be a useful (for the right) by product of our decadent reactionary MSM is the way it destabilises the primary political vehicles of the left.

      Right-wing fear mongering causes a drop in the polls; the pressures of that causes infighting. It is difficult to have coherent policy when on the one hand the primary media voice of the left is very serious, pearl clutching “respectable people” like Paul Quinn, Brian Edwards and Josie Pagani, and on the other anything genuinely left is subjected to relentlessly hostile media attacks.

      • Ad 16.2.1
        20 February 2016 at 11:24 am

        If there were any major fear among the population, you’d see much greater poll fluctuation. Poll after poll on “satisfaction with Life” shows Kiwis remarkably contented. Even the GFC and Christchurch didn’t shake our base equanimity.

        Also, to a large degree the MSM is so disaggragated now there is no “Town Hall effect” of common stories dominating discourse. Certainly not enough to form single large waves of sentiment to build.

    • Anne 16.3
      20 February 2016 at 11:23 am

      Well said Ad @16
      The combination of Labour/Green and NZ First represents a majority cross-section of public opinion. To be sure, there are many voters yet to comprehend this reality but provided Labour stick to their present path that is likely to slowly change.

      NZ First is a home for the more socially conservative voter… Labour is the political power house left of centre… and the Greens have soaked up the socially liberal voters. As Iprent has noted, their economic polices are all sufficiently similar (with some notable differences in emphasis) for them to be able to cooperate successfully as an MMP style coalition govt.

      It augurs well for a new and infinitely more mature government than we have at present.

      • Ad 16.3.1
        20 February 2016 at 11:33 am

        One can but hope.

      • Skinny 16.3.2
        20 February 2016 at 12:09 pm

        Put simply the Government in waiting. I would throw a final life line to the Maori Party now, secret talks, in or out last chance!

        @ 1% Fox is a gone burger, she should be targeted and wise enough to accept, Favell won’t have the guts to stick it out being their sole MP and in opposition. 2 heads are better than 1.

        • Colonial Viper 16.3.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 12:15 pm

          Put simply the Government in waiting. I would throw a final life line to the Maori Party now, secret talks, in or out last chance!

          Absolutely agreed.

          And its too bad Labour fucked Mana. Hone’s and Laila’s two votes would be more critical than ever in trying to form a Labour led coalition.

          But fuck it, Labour doesn’t need political allies in Parliament, and it doesn’t need to think strategically about MMP.

          • b waghorn 16.3.2.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 12:25 pm

            Mana got what it deserved for selling out to a rich man trying to by political favour.

          • Skinny 16.3.2.1.2
            20 February 2016 at 12:52 pm

            CV Hone winning the TTT seat was on the skids before the hook up with the Internet Party, that just pushed the final count out. Trust me I know too many people who had voted for him in all previous elections had told me they were not voting for him, abit of honesty by them as few told him to his face, gutless, may have made all the difference and Hone would have taken stock of the situation. Pity alright.

            A lot of reasons they switched too. Not enough work being done in his own seat. Too big for his boots. Backing the under dog. Time to give someone less aggressive a go.

            Hone is gone and won’t be back he won’t beat Davis that is certain. Mana and the Maori Party merge is his only shot. But really Maori Party are mostly Tory Maori and would vote National if they weren’t around, actually this polls says some have crossed back to Natcorp.

            • marty mars 16.3.2.1.2.1
              20 February 2016 at 4:42 pm

              you know less than you think and you think less than you know

            • Colonial Viper 16.3.2.1.2.2
              20 February 2016 at 6:58 pm

              I agree that there were a tonne of problems with Hone and his political campaign in his electorate.

              But note that Hone’s vote actually went up by 800 in 2014. And he lost by only that much again.

              And that took a combination of Labour, National and NZF voters co-ordinated to defeat him.

              • Skinny …
                20 February 2016 at 8:07 pm

                I don’t really want to bother with the past CV, the Mana past. The Maori roll change and new young voters and the young crew recruiting for them done well. The seat is huge Labour strong in Auckland West and Mana were weak there so their COS told me just prior to polling day. He knew it was looking grim and I knew after I hang up his call Davis was 80/20 odds on to win. Kelvin is a good bloke he come to see us polling day, he was nervous I shook his hand and told him to relax he was home in his seat. I was slightly embarrassed and apologised that I had endorsed Hone ( not for him but for some of the crew I know) to my network to vote for him less than 24 hours previously, explained it will make no difference in the end. I told Kel Labour fucked him over on the list, he agreeded. He is a good man we get on well.

          • Tautuhi 16.3.2.1.3
            21 February 2016 at 6:03 am

            Labour need to wake up before the next Election and not go shooting themselves in the foot like they did at the last election?

            • Chooky 16.3.2.1.3.1
              21 February 2016 at 8:38 am

              +100 Tuatuhi…Labour by undermining Hone Harawiria with Davis standing against him in TTT ….lost the Election

              • Skinny …
                21 February 2016 at 10:23 am

                No it his home patch so he had just as much right as Hone to stand there. The issue was Labour put Davis too far down the list (especially after previous election) so he needed a really good party vote and the polls were showing that wasn’t going to happen so he was forced to campaign strongly to win the electorate seat. Had they bumped him ahead of deadwood list MP’s Hone would have won easy and the Region got 2 left MP’s and Mana another MP. Unfortunately for Hone Labour will put Kelvin in the do or die situation again next year. This time I agree and it should be widely known so maybe Mana don’t bother the hiding to nothing by contesting in 2017 and wasting party votes that could go to the other party’s.

        • marty mars 16.3.2.2
          20 February 2016 at 12:34 pm

          nah the MP have exhausted, breathless they wait – no lifelines please.

    • mlpc 16.4
      20 February 2016 at 11:40 am

      But my main point about Little is that he doesn’t look coherent.

      It’s simply not credible to say on the one hand that we shouldn’t sign up for the TPPA, and then in the next breath to say that we probably should come out if we do go in.

      What that actually says is that either he doesn’t know what to think, or that he is not revealing his true position.

      • Colonial Viper 16.4.1
        20 February 2016 at 12:11 pm

        Or perhaps that his caucus is heavily conflicted over the issue.

      • Skinny 16.4.2
        20 February 2016 at 12:24 pm

        Obviously the rightwing MP’s within Labour were hard to bring into line. Even after a caucus camp where Goff and Shearer remained defiant and went solo costing Labour up to 3% in this poll.

        Shearer should have been made to walk the plank. So what if he was to do a Horan and go independent. Same result as Horan after the 2017 election, never heard of again!

        Matt & Andrew lost some credit with myself because they didn’t hit the eject button. The message would have been loud and clear and the bounce instant.

        • Olwyn 16.4.2.1
          20 February 2016 at 12:54 pm

          Matt & Andrew lost some credit with myself because they didn’t hit the eject button. The message would have been loud and clear and the bounce instant.

          To do that effectively, you have to have an enthusiastic movement behind you, for whom such a move all but goes without saying. I think Andrew Little is doing very well, given the recent history of the party and its current circumstances. But a Labour Party cannot bring about real change all by itself.

          In the Pilger film on Maori TV last week, a spokesperson from Venezuela spoke of an elite who saw themselves as part of a global community rather than their country. The situation here is somewhat similar. But a condition for being part of that global community is the willingness to see a large chunk of one’s fellow citizens excluded from consideration. John Key meets that condition so John Key is allowed to borrow money so middle NZ is kept happy – do otherwise and who knows what will happen. Labour is between a stone and hard place on that front – if it shows too much concern for its traditional constituency, the lenders will be worried, if it doesn’t, it has very little purpose that National can’t fill more reliably. This is not to say that Labour should try to appeal to the “missing millions.” It is to say that the “missing millions” need to organise and exert pressure on Labour, just as “business” exerts pressure on National. You are in the position to negotiate when you have a host of angry people behind you. I hope that the momentum from the TPPA marches continues to build rather than fizzle out.

          • Colonial Viper 16.4.2.1.1
            20 February 2016 at 7:00 pm

            In the Pilger film on Maori TV last week, a spokesperson from Venezuela spoke of an elite who saw themselves as part of a global community rather than their country. The situation here is somewhat similar.

            Yep. A trans-national global elite willing to sell out their own sovereign countries in order to be part of, or associated with, this billionaires club.

            • ropata 16.4.2.1.1.1
              20 February 2016 at 7:51 pm

              These upper class knobs have been conducting underhanded class warfare for 30 years, of course they have more in common with other toffs overseas than their fellow countrymen at home. Their primary allegiance is to money not their own nation.

              “Ask not what you country can do for you, but what you can steal from your country”

              But NZ is under no obligation to suck up to foreign capitalists, that is part of the TINA narrative of the lying neoliberals.

            • RedLogix 16.4.2.1.1.2
              21 February 2016 at 12:30 am

              Yep. A trans-national global elite willing to sell out their own sovereign countries in order to be part of, or associated with, this billionaires club.

              Or to return to a theme I’ve made before; a trans-national elite who’ve been able to effortlessly occupy the space left vacant due to the failure of true global, democratic governance to emerge from the nascent framework of the UN.

              While there will always be a need for a sane nationalism; the left has done itself no favours with this neo-isolationism we seem to have fallen into.

        • Ad 16.4.2.2
          20 February 2016 at 1:29 pm

          Skinny, that’s more to the point.

          Little as I see him is experienced in playing from a weak position – precisely as any experienced union leader for the last 30 years.

          That means he will watch carefully who appears to be on what side as they state it, determine which if any might potentially change, do his policy homework, and only then once he knows the strength of his own position in that context, actually land on a position in public.

          That way he shows a unified caucus position, rather than what we’ve had.

          It will appear very cautious, but it is precisely the right modus operandi for Labour’s caucus, and precisely what is needed for a fully MMP coalition. Which is what an alternative government would look and function like.

        • Matthew Hooton 16.4.2.3
          20 February 2016 at 3:58 pm

          Are you seriously saying that expelling a former leader from Labour would have been good for its poll rating and long-term electability?

          • Don't worry. Be happy 16.4.2.3.1
            20 February 2016 at 5:21 pm

            Shearer was never a leader Hoots. He was a plant.

          • Skinny 16.4.2.3.2
            20 February 2016 at 7:30 pm

            That is a gamble I would take Hooton, it is called strong leadership. The issue was a party position unlike say Natcorp and the flag which has the acceptable element of choice, however even so there is none of the Chairs MP’s talking to the media openly about which way their flag flutters.

            I know the circumstances are different but Peters made an immediate call and sacked Horan. No real drama. People like that because it is true leadership, and for some was a factor in why they chose NZF, and didn’t the party vote increase after the last election.

            • Colonial Viper 16.4.2.3.2.1
              20 February 2016 at 7:43 pm

              NZF was one of the very few parties to experience a real increase in party vote.

              I believe they will get another boost in 2017.

              • b waghorn …
                20 February 2016 at 7:56 pm

                Rural nz is ripe for the picking, its a shame only Winny will capitalise, labour should have O’Connor out loud and proud .

              • Skinny …
                20 February 2016 at 8:59 pm

                Yes things are looking very good for NZF and at least one more seat to go along with Northland if not 2 and 3 is not beyond the relms of possibility. Especially if they have a big hitter joining Winston in the bus.

                • b waghorn …
                  20 February 2016 at 9:16 pm

                  Mmm the Jones boy , do we really need an in love with him self political whore.

                  • Skinny …
                    20 February 2016 at 11:28 pm

                    People wanting a change from the normal Natcorp operation would be wise to put Jones walk away aside. He doesn’t need to comeback, but we need NZF to Govern bar a miracle, and stick around as a party into the future. Ripping him to bits will be why he says no thanks!

                    • Stuart Munro …
                      21 February 2016 at 12:23 am

                      Whatever else NZF may be it is a natural predator of neglected blue country electorates – and as the economic failures progress that’s most of them.

              • Tautuhi …
                21 February 2016 at 6:08 am

                Winston needs to go headhunting and find some good candidates?

  17. Chuck 17
    20 February 2016 at 4:49 pm

    The left wing having to rely on Winston Peters to have any chance of forming the next government will be giving Andrew Little nightmares. As National will, by far, have the most votes / seats and could very well end up not needing a collation partner (maybe ACT and or Dunne will suffice). However if NZF is required, Winston will get his baubles of office, and not have to vomit in his mouth every time he thinks of having to allow the Greens into the cabinet room. On another note; Labour / Little’s position on the TPPA will make him cannon fodder come the leader debates. They need to either fully support or leave no doubt they will give notice to exit (once / if they get into Government). Large % of NZ’ers are not silly, they see right through his current position, of course I excuse most of the commentators on this website from including them in this group :).

    • Colonial Viper 17.1
      20 February 2016 at 5:48 pm

      On another note; Labour / Little’s position on the TPPA will make him cannon fodder come the leader debates.

      And Labour’s position on their policy on CGT.

      And Labour’s position on their policy to increase the Super age.

      National may also propose Finance debates between English and Robertson.

    • Tautuhi 17.2
      20 February 2016 at 10:38 pm

      Going with National would be a last resort for Winston after National and Jenny Shipley shafted him, I don’t think he is madly in love with John Key either like the rest of New Zealanders are.

  18. Wainwright 18
    20 February 2016 at 5:50 pm

    The problem is certainly not that Labour has gone too far left because it hasn’t gone very far left at all. The problem is that Labour continues not to differentiate itself meaningfully from National. The fucking around on the TPPA stance, the lack of follow up on the teritary ed policy, the fac tthey’re still releasing individual policy instead of presenting a clear principled vision for the country.

    Why would you bother to vote for a pack of backstabbing muppets like Goff and Shearer who don’t even know when to stand on the side of the people of NZ? Yeah Goff is leaving but he’s symbolic of all the rest of the unreformed Rogernomes.

    • Colonial Viper 18.1
      20 February 2016 at 5:54 pm

      This is obvious to you. It is obvious to me.

      In the Labour Thorndon Bubble however, they think that they are way smarter than you and me.

      What do you think the evidence so far suggests?

      Then here on The Standard there are still a few who think that Labour is still worth supporting because, to paraphrase Cunliffe, at least Labour will use anaesthetic when they amputate your good leg, whereas National wouldn’t bother.

      • pat 18.1.1
        20 February 2016 at 10:31 pm

        If your leg was going to amputated (whether you liked it or not) which would you prefer?

      • ropata 18.1.2
        21 February 2016 at 10:26 am

        I’ll probably keep voting Labour because, although I admire a lot of the Greens values, they don’t have much depth of political experience, and they have a large proportion of dangerous weirdoes like anti-vaxxers and homeopaths, that should not be near the levers of power. Similarly NZF is a mishmash of grumpy arch-conservatives…

        Labour is the only credible opposition party and while they may be in a slump they have a lot of good people and union support and their traditional values are sound. I am gutted that Cunliffe was ousted but understand that he failed to connect with the average Kiwi, perhaps Andrew Little’s style will change that

    • Tautuhi 18.2
      20 February 2016 at 10:46 pm

      Labour actually don’t think when they announce policy and they have forgotten who their key voters are, they have abandoned their existing customers and have focused on winning over die hard National voters. In business there is a saying that “it is 10x harder to get a new customer than to keep an existing customer”.

      Labour got lost in 1984 under Roger Douglas and have never really recovered, they are still is a “state of confusion”.

      They need to identify where there key supporters are and make sure they get that vote first, “the missing million would be a good place to start”, most I would say were Labour voters who “just can’t be bothered anymore”?

      • Wainwright 18.2.1
        21 February 2016 at 3:32 pm

        The missing million is a bit of a McGuffin. Yes turnout is down but Labour’s only strategy to boost it last election was to go out and say ‘hey remember to vote for us’. They didn’t give people a reason to vote for them. They didn’t inspire anyone. They ran the same old claptrp centrist over-detailed mummy-knows-best policies they’ve pushed since 2009.The sense of entitlement is massivde.

  19. upnorth 19
    21 February 2016 at 10:41 pm

    Morgan poll backs up TV one poll

    Little unelectable

Links to post