The poll that matters will be completed on Saturday

107 comments on “The poll that matters will be completed on Saturday ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Rightly or wrongly 1

   21 September 2017 at 8:38 am

   I agree with you Weka – Saturday’s poll is what counts.

   Aparently there is another poll out tonight from Reid research so it will be interesting to see what it sees.

   I suspect that on Sunday morning there will be a large percentage of gloomy despondent people in NZ – just don’t know yet whether they will be left or right votrs.
   • weka 1.1

     21 September 2017 at 8:39 am

     Heh, I think that last statement is the only sure thing we can say about this election.
   • Matthew Whitehead 1.2

     21 September 2017 at 12:35 pm

     Well, now it’s more like the poll that counts is every day’s one between September 11th and September 23rd, (ie. every day of advance voting is like its own mini-election with different facts and context available to voters who opted to head in to the polls then) but I agree that polls are just indicators of probability for the votes that really count, even if they are statistically rigorous. It helps prepare us for the election result to know those guesses in context, with their limitations.
2. Union city greens 2

   21 September 2017 at 8:40 am

   A big vote from South Auckland and the left will take it on Saturday night.
   The challenge is to get bums off seats and in to the booths.
   If a neck and neck race to dump the government isn’t enough motivation I don’t know what is.
   • millsy 2.1

     21 September 2017 at 8:52 am

     Yes, it was Auckland that won the 2005 election for Labour. Whether it can happen again is an open question.
     • Union city greens 2.1.1

       21 September 2017 at 8:58 am

       It could happen. It’s certainly more likely to happen now than the past two elections.
       All depends if labour can motivate those they consider their core constituents.
       If they can’t do that in such a tight race, well, we’re all doomed.
3. Cynical jester 3

   21 September 2017 at 8:44 am

   The poll tonight will be a national slanted one . We all need to Get off the computers and start door knocking NOW. Get your mates your family everyone to vote and vote red/red or green/red. There’s too much at stake. Lets do this
   • james 3.1

     21 September 2017 at 9:18 am

     Why will it be National slanted ??? – even the CB poll is in line with it – and according to One news last night that result was in line with the internal polling of both main parties ….
     • weka 3.1.1

       21 September 2017 at 9:36 am

       Some polls favour the left more than the right and vice versa. I don’t know which polls go which way though.
     • weka 3.1.2

       21 September 2017 at 9:37 am

       “and according to One news last night that result was in line with the internal polling of both main parties ….”

       What does that even mean? Internal poll of polls? Overall numbers or the actual % for each party?

       Did they cover the refused to answer and the undecideds? What about the non vote?

       We’re really not very good at this stuff in NZ.
   • Matthew Whitehead 3.2

     21 September 2017 at 12:38 pm

     RR has been friendlier to the nats than CB was in these last couple of polls, and it’s only recently that CB’s numbers have moved more to the centre. I was initially wondering if this was because it had gone rogue twice in a row, (a very unlikely event normally, but given they are trying new methodology this year, a more reasonable assumption than normal too) but I’m thinking perhaps it may have simply been that Reid Research picked up a late surge back towards National earlier than Colmar Brunton did because their internet panel is more agile in responding to voter mood. We’ll have to wait to election day to see who had the right of it.
4. Howdy 4

   21 September 2017 at 8:45 am

   Still not sure who all these PR articles talking to?

   Does anyone actually think that there are people taking the time to read this site who are not going to vote, have not already decided to vote Left/Right and wont be swayed?

   I mean, seriously?

   Shouting into the chamber….
   • weka 4.1

     21 September 2017 at 9:15 am

     You miss the point. The people that read this post have actual lives with real people in them. It’s what we do with what we read here that counts. Maybe you’d like to join in.

     And even hardcore politicos need encouragement at times. It’s called solidarity.
     • Howdy 4.1.1

       21 September 2017 at 10:28 am

       I am not missing the point – I think my point is PRECISELY that this is about “real” people.
       Newsflash: The real people you need to get to are NOT READING THIS SITE.

       I think, and I am happy to be wrong, but this smells like “web-activism”/”echo chamber” mentality.

       I agree, knocking on doors and actually doing something for real people is what is needed.

       Then why are there a dozen articles telling people on a left political site how to vote left?

       If you are here reading this, you are NOT THE PROBLEM!?

       They might as well tell everyone how to wipe their arse…

       Harsh I know, but effort should be spent wisely.
       • weka 4.1.1.1

         21 September 2017 at 10:48 am

         Ok, I think you didn’t read my comment properly. I read this site, and then I go and talk to people in my life who don’t read this site. How are those people I talk to not real people?

         And when I write a post and people who are reading it go, yeah, we need to get out there in the next few days and get people out to vote, and then they do do that, even if it’s just taking to a friend in the supermarket or to their neighbour across the fence, how is that an echo chamber when you’ve just acknowledged that door knocking or work in the real world is useful and is what’s needed?

         “Then why are there a dozen articles telling people on a left political site how to vote left?”

         Lol, because there’s a tussle going on between Labour and Green supporters over the left vote. I think you will find most of those posts are trying to convince people to vote Green instead of Labour or vice versa.

         But sure, some of them are still targeted at the general readership and pointing out the massive problem that is Labour. Not everyone who reads here is left wing. Some are RW, some are swing voters, some are non-voters, some are off the L/R spectrum altogether.
5. Lara 5

   21 September 2017 at 8:50 am

   I’ve already voted. As a Green Party member I was always going to vote Green. For a myriad of reasons.

   I’ve been thinking through the logic of this, and trying to prepare myself for Saturday. Last election I was so emotionally invested, when National won again I was gutted and stayed in bed for three days! (I work from home, so I can do that and still work).

   So to avoid time wasted I’m trying to prepare myself this time for another win by the Nats.

   Their base of support is older voters, farmers and the richer folks in NZ. Lots of overlap between these three groups. Older people have a higher voter turn out rate, as do the more wealthy.

   As for Labour, their traditional base of support is working class people and the poor. But poorer people have a lower voter turnout. The left in general has more support from younger than older people, and again the younger the cohort the lower the voter turnout.

   And so if National win and the left as a bloc lose, I think it will have a lot to do with large numbers of people not voting.

   Yet it is the young and the poor who are most adversely impacted by a National government.

   When I first voted it was under the old FPP system. I recall voting in an electorate which was a strong National seat, so I had my protest vote for McGullicuddy Serious. The whole thing felt like sham, I knew my one vote could have zero effect. And we did have election results where more people in the country voted Labour, yet National had more MPs and formed a government. That to me appears to be fundamentally undemocratic. So I can understand people feeling disenfranchised and disconnected from politics under such a system.

   But now we have MMP. My one vote counts just as much as the richest, and poorest, person in NZ. My one vote counts just as much as FJK. I have power. It’s only the power of one, but I am equal in our electorate system. And that feels democratic, that’s real.

   We have such a wide range of political parties to choose from. And from within National, Labour, Greens, NZ First, Maori, Mana and ACT (all parties who will be or are likely to have representation next week) there is plenty of variety to choose from. All their policies are available via websites. We have all the information at our fingertips to make informed decisions. Although no party is going to meet the desires perfectly if each voter, you’ll be able to find a party there that meets the majority of your desires.

   And so I am really struggling to see why those most adversely affected by the last 9 years of National aren’t getting out to vote them out.

   Do these people not make the connection that who is in power in Wellington directly affects their lives? That collectively they have the power to change their lives if they vote?

   I guess maybe that’s the problem. How to overcome it? Conversation. Dialogue. Without judgement and without badgering.

   I’ll be doing that over the next few days for sure.

   Sorry about the long post Weka, but I’m getting really worried about Saturday.
   • Lara 5.1

     21 September 2017 at 8:56 am

     If I was voting in my own self interest I should have voted National. I’d get a very nice tax cut thank-you-very-much.
     • Matthew Whitehead 5.1.1

       21 September 2017 at 12:43 pm

       But your values are your self-interest too. 🙂 You get to live in a clean country, that cares about other people if the Greens get influence in the next government.

       Voting based on factors other than your wallet doesn’t mean there isn’t some self-interest to it, just a more enlightened, holistic type of self-interest that realizes the value of other people and the land and intangible qualities like “positive political environments.”
   • WILD KATIPO 5.2

     21 September 2017 at 9:05 am

     And so I am really struggling to see why those most adversely affected by the last 9 years of National aren’t getting out to vote them out.

     Do these people not make the connection that who is in power in Wellington directly affects their lives? That collectively they have the power to change their lives if they vote?

     ……………………………………………..

     The real problem is lack of civics teaching. And neo liberal govts on the whole esp right wing ones do not want that to happen in schools. The answer is obvious : it would immediately politicize young voters and more importantly , – show that there is in fact , an alternative to TINA.

     And that it would also teach about Keynesian economics, – and things such as true social democratic values. The very thing the last 3 decades of neo liberal govts have tried to denigrate , discredit and encourage revisionism about.

     Couple this with the fact most young people are more interested in Saturday nights entertainment ( remember when we were in our early twenty’s ! ) . These govt annalists know this. They do not fear the ‘ youth vote’ . The same with the ‘working’ vote . These capitalist know that many of the working class are not particularly educated – or even interested in politics. They know many of them do not have aspirations to run a large corporate but just have a job.

     And so they also know they have a fair amount of wriggle room to bully workers.

     And sad to say , that it will take a very large catalyst to change that.

     In the 1960’s ,… the young had the Vietnam war,- the peace movement. The generation before that had the post war rebuild. And now ?… we have had …. a slow grinding down of social conditions,… much like the frog in the pot of water.

     And that’s what these neo liberals bank on.

     It would take another Great Depression for there to be a mass sea change, … and the last thing these neo liberals want is civics in schools.
     • Lara 5.2.1

       21 September 2017 at 9:20 am

       “The real problem is lack of civics teaching”

       But that’s just not true Weka.

       I used to teach high school; senior biology and geography, and social studies to years 9 and 10.

       I know our electoral system and government systems are taught, because I taught them. The different branches of government, our MMP voting system, how bills are passed through parliament, the select committee process. All of it. And I explained carefully WHY it is important. The concept of democracy.

       In social studies which every Kiwi kid gets in years 9 and 10 it’s taught every election year, done to death in fact. And often in years between too.

       It’s also done at primary school, but I can’t say so much about that because I was a secondary school teacher.

       Plenty of resources ready to go here for all levels. Some of which I used.

       And so, I hear that refrain a lot. And when I do, to me, it’s kinda like someone saying “the sky isn’t blue” when I know it is. We do teach it. A lot. And I taught in several schools in the North Island. Maybe it wasn’t taught when you went to school, but it is being taught today.
       • Lara 5.2.1.1

         21 September 2017 at 9:25 am

         Have you read Neil Postman’s “Amusing Ourselves to Death”?

         It’s a great little read about how technology changes public discourse. From pen and paper and snail mail, to the telegraph, to radio, to television. It stops there because it was written in 1985.

         IMO the internet (how we use it anyway) is changing our public discourse further. Twitter is the best (worst?) example. You can’t convey complicated concepts well in 140 characters or less.

         Our attention spans are getting smaller and smaller. Our engagement less and less. We are diverted constantly by irrelevant trivia, and the big important stuff is buried in a pile of shit.

         I wonder if the effect of technology on our public discourse is a big reason for younger voters not engaging.
         • WILD KATIPO 5.2.1.1.1

           21 September 2017 at 9:38 am

           Well , it certainly is something…

           Think back to WW2 when people huddled round the radio for news of how the war was going and the latest political statement…. or ,… during the 1960’s / 70’s where there was more or less one TV station.

           There was certainly less variance of views , – and an emphasis on reading , – the reading of newspapers for example.

           Now we have divers sources of news, entertainment and the like.

           It would seem to me ,… less group accord is a large factor.

           Basically a splintering of society into a thousand small pieces all going off in different directions. And what of our University’s?… is it not , … that the claim has been made many times over,… that those economists who opposed neo liberal theorem were gradually overlooked, bypassed in favour of those who were?
       • weka 5.2.1.2

         21 September 2017 at 9:38 am

         not weka 😉
       • WILD KATIPO 5.2.1.3

         21 September 2017 at 9:39 am

         Oopsey ,- Wild Katipo 🙂
         • weka 5.2.1.3.1

           21 September 2017 at 9:43 am

           damn wildlife, all over the place.
           • Lara 5.2.1.3.1.1

             21 September 2017 at 10:16 am

             Oops! Sorry folks. Mixing you up and all. And when I see Katipo… I keep thinking Kakapo 🙂
             • weka …

               21 September 2017 at 10:20 am

               We need a Kākāpō!
       • tracey 5.2.1.4

         21 September 2017 at 12:49 pm

         Easier to think people are uneducated than deal with their disengagement. The more people vote for proven liars the more real.people turn away from the system
   • james 5.3

     21 September 2017 at 9:21 am

     “My one vote counts just as much as the richest, and poorest, person in NZ. My one vote counts just as much as FJK. I have power. It’s only the power of one, but I am equal in our electorate system. And that feels democratic, that’s real.

     We have such a wide range of political parties to choose from. And from within National, Labour, Greens, NZ First, Maori, Mana and ACT (all parties who will be or are likely to have representation next week) there is plenty of variety to choose from. All their policies are available via websites. We have all the information at our fingertips to make informed decisions. Although no party is going to meet the desires perfectly if each voter, you’ll be able to find a party there that meets the majority of your desires.”

     Apart from the FJK – this was a really important point – and exactly why I have told my kids its so important to vote.
     • Matthew Whitehead 5.3.1

       21 September 2017 at 12:52 pm

       Mana are very unlikely to be in parliament next week, I wouldn’t bank on it. Even if the TTT electorate poll is completely rubbish, it’s hard for it to be so rubbish that Hone would close a 30% gap even if it were a rogue poll that underpolled him and he was trending upwards as fast as Jacinda sent Labour’s party vote.

       Polling shows critical electorates are as follows:

       Ohariu (results defunct due to Dunne’s resignation, it’s anyone’s guess)
       Waiariki – Te Ururoa Flavell leading.
       Te Tai Hauāuru – Howie Tamati leading.
       Te Tai Tokerau – As above, Kelvin Davis leading.
       Epsom – David Seymour leading in three-way race.
       Nelson – Nick Smith narrowly leading in three-way race.
       Northland – unfortunately not polled, but at a guess I would likely expect it to stay with Peters.
       Ilam – unfortunately not polled, however I expect Raf Manji to at least give Gerry Brownlee a decent fight.

       Ilam’s result would be super weird because as an independent, Raf Manji would remove the 120th list seat from Parliament rather than add an overhang seat, presumably because someone unnecessarily worried about tons of independents adding seats to Parliament when we transitioned to MMP. This means that the largest party is likely to be the one losing out on a seat to let Manji into Parliament, which is likely to be the Nats. He’s a right-of-centre independent last I heard, but he has very little public info available, so it’ll be a Big Deal™ if he wins.
       • weka 5.3.1.1

         21 September 2017 at 1:05 pm

         Huh, that might explain the green meme endorsement, although that would be very cynical.
         • Matthew Whitehead 5.3.1.1.1

           21 September 2017 at 2:04 pm

           It’s super difficult to predict whose seat will be removed, though. For instance, the Greens might be the ones to lose the 120th seat because they gain an extra one on the special vote, or Labour might lose out, or even New Zealand First if they just narrowly qualify for a seventh seat. You need to know the relative party votes of every party in order to know for sure who wins and loses by an independent winning an electorate, because you need to specifically know which party gets seat #120. It’s a bizarre way to calculate seats and we should probably just give independents an overhang seat instead, it’s far less disruptive to proportionality.

           I suspect the real reason is that people in Ilam who don’t vote for the Nats are sick of Gerry Brownlee, and wish they could unseat him. I expect a lot of tactical voting from Labour and Green supporters for Manji.
   • BM 5.4

     21 September 2017 at 9:22 am

     Their base of support is older voters, farmers and the richer folks in NZ. Lots of overlap between these three groups. Older people have a higher voter turn out rate, as do the more wealthy.

     Don’t forget all the tradies, that now vote National
     • cleangreen 5.4.1

       21 September 2017 at 9:39 am

       BM : “Don’t forget all the ‘tradies’ that now vote National”

       Our circle are all ‘tradies’ and all have signalled their circle of ‘tradies’ certainly will not be voting national BM as they are to restricted by new stupid rules for one and because of the distain at seeing National importing cheap imported trade labour to drive down trade labour costs artificially.

       These imported ‘slave labour tradies’ will likely be the only ones voting National for sure not kiwi based tradies.

       This debunking of BM’s ‘bullshit’ comes from a ‘tradie’ family
       • BM 5.4.1.1

         21 September 2017 at 9:44 am

         I didn’t say all tradies but there’ now quite a large chunk that do now, eg building trades.

         30 years ago you would be lucky to find anyone from the trades that voted National.
         • millsy 5.4.1.1.1

           21 September 2017 at 10:29 am

           It is largely due to the fact that 30 years ago, most tradies would have been directly employed, either in the private sector or for one of the govt trading enterprises. Since all that crap happened after 1984, the trades sector is mainly piece work done by independent contractors and small business owners.
           • BM 5.4.1.1.1.1

             21 September 2017 at 10:32 am

             Exactly, see

             https://thestandard.org.nz/the-poll-that-matters-will-be-completed-on-saturday/#comment-1388327

             What I find interesting is how many young trade guys end goal is to go into business for themselves, they’re convinced that’s the road to wealth
         • cleangreen 5.4.1.1.2

           21 September 2017 at 2:47 pm

           BM same today we have found (in the provinces) maybe you are in the ‘speculation sphere’ in auckland.

           I have been here as a tradie for 45 yrs+ and family for generations too.
     • weka 5.4.2

       21 September 2017 at 9:42 am

       “Don’t forget all the tradies, that now vote National”

       It’s one of the failings of the left to really get to grips with what has changed around class in the last 30 years. Too much time arguing about Waitakere Man and bashing Labour, not enough time looking more in depth at what is going on.
       • BM 5.4.2.1

         21 September 2017 at 9:53 am

         The root cause was when all the government depts like the post office and railways got broken up and sold off.

         As a very young man back then working for the post office, we had mechanics, fitter turners, welders, carpenters, cabinet makers, bodybuilders, panel beaters, car painters and even an upholsterer!
         Everything was done in-house, it was a completely separate world working for the government back then.

         Many of those trade guys who got laid off, took their redundancy pay and went into business for themselves the national voting tradie was born.
         • weka 5.4.2.1.1

           21 September 2017 at 9:56 am

           Yes, and the sell offs/redundancies being done by Labour and from which Labour has yet to properly resile means there is bugger all for them to vote for.
           • tracey 5.4.2.1.1.1

             21 September 2017 at 1:06 pm

             Yup. And the de unionising of labour which corresponds with real wages grinding to a halt while accomodation costs have soared
         • cleangreen 5.4.2.1.2

           21 September 2017 at 2:53 pm

           ‘Many of those trade guys who got laid off, took their redundancy pay and went into business for themselves the national voting tradie was born.’

           No No No,

           National voting traidie was born!!!!!!!

           Wher’s the proof, as our ‘regional’ group of ‘new’ tradies are not overtly national voting as you depict sorry not true.
     • ianmac 5.4.3

       21 September 2017 at 10:27 am

       Thats useful BM.
       And don’t forget all the tradies who vote Labour.
   • James Thrace 5.5

     21 September 2017 at 9:58 am

     Lara, you left out the biggest bloc of the 500,000 imported voters under National over the last nine years.

     If anecdata is anything to go by, imported voters typically tend to follow the government in power at the time they entered the country.

     Witness the Tampa refugees. They vote labour because, Labour let them into the country.

     Now: We have oodles upon oodles of foreign permanent residents who have taken up cudgels in the war against the poor, by backing the government that let them in. Hence, the rise of the so called “Blue Dragons”

     Never mind the fact that Labour recognises ethnic diversity far more than National.

     IMHO, it’s a good reason to follow the Australians, and limit voting rights for central government to Citizens only. Local government can be open to both permanent residents and citizens, as the impact is less likely to be felt.

     From a social policy setting and perspective, Citizens may be more inclined to think long term, than a permanent resident who might leave in the next year or two, and will “reward” the government that let them live here in the short term.

     I might do a dissertation on this… “the impact of the distinction between permanent residents and citizens on voting patterns”
     • WILD KATIPO 5.5.1

       21 September 2017 at 12:05 pm

       … ” IMHO, it’s a good reason to follow the Australians, and limit voting rights for central government to Citizens only ” …

       Exactly.

       … ” Now: We have oodles upon oodles of foreign permanent residents who have taken up cudgels in the war against the poor, by backing the government that let them in. Hence, the rise of the so called “Blue Dragons” …

       And this why I’ve always felt that way as well. To me its insulting that people from other country’s can come here and , – not really understanding our particular social needs , and who barely have a grasp of our political history ,- can artificially distort what the citizen base deem important. I also believe it was a deliberate and cynical tactical move by National. This didn’t just happen by accident. It was done to provide cheap foreign labour and create downwards pressure on wages. And to provide a massive injection in voters for National.

       And its time that cozy little arrangement was stopped.
     • tracey 5.5.2

       21 September 2017 at 1:08 pm

       Half a million immigrants have become eligible to vote in the last 9 years? Can you provide a link?
       • Lara 5.5.2.1

         21 September 2017 at 1:59 pm

         I think it may be more like half that. If this data is correct then we have a net gain of 214,200 over the last 9 years. Mostly from India and China.

         I like data. And I like accuracy. So I’ll provide the link.
         • James Thrace 5.5.2.1.1

           21 September 2017 at 5:36 pm

           Resident Decisions by Financial Year has a zip file.

           A quick gander through that shows that since 2007/2008 a grand total of 160,699 permanent resident visas have been granted to people over the age of 20. I took out all the approved visas to people in the age range 0 -19.

           That is a quick browse. Still rather substantial. The remainder of the 500K who have moved here may take up residency at some point, who knows.
   • tracey 5.6

     21 September 2017 at 10:00 am

     I understand the angst. Since 1987 there has been a concerted move to individualism at the expensive of the group. This has impacted in many ways. Look at Union membership. It is no coincidence that union membership has fallen and real wages are pathetic.

     So even the so called working class have shifted to so called self interest. However it is not true self interest. EG unless you can afford private health insurance as you get older the deteriorating health system directly impacts you.

     Now we have lies actually being outted and over 40% of voters stay with it. But the outrage at Turei, and the relentless media pursuit of her forced a leader to resign.

     The PM on the other hand stays. Collins and Bennett stay. Why? Because of an in part mistaken belief that people will individually be better off.

     It is not a conspiracy it is the culmination of over 30 years of dripping vitriol at the vulnerable so we no longer give a shit ( or over 40% of us).
6. RRM 6

   21 September 2017 at 9:00 am

   There’s a huge Maori Party billboard over Waterloo Quay this morning:

   “Labour betrayed Maori.
   Foreshore and Seabed Act.
   Party vote Maori Party.”

   Just fyi…
   • millsy 6.1

     21 September 2017 at 9:03 am

     A vote for the Maori Party is a vote for National.

     And the F and S Act was needed to ensure that our beaches will remain in public hands usable by everyone.
     • james 6.1.1

       21 September 2017 at 9:28 am

       “And the F and S Act was needed to ensure that our beaches will remain in public hands usable by everyone.”

       And Labours deputy leader joined labour to make sure things like the F ans S Act didnt happen again.

       https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/95326687/labours-kelvin-davis-is-ready-for-the-spotlight

       “Davis entered politics after strongly disagreeing with Labour’s move to nationalise the foreshore and seabed.

       “To make sure things like the foreshore and seabed don’t happen you have to be inside,” he said.”
     • Matthew Whitehead 6.1.2

       21 September 2017 at 1:04 pm

       While they haven’t categorically ruled out National, I take Marama Fox on her word (at least until she demonstrates that it’s not trustworthy) that they will consult their members formally before deciding on coalition posture, and informally their members are saying they prefer Labour.

       It’s also worth pointing out that every time the Māori Party has worked with National before, National would have been the government without their support anyway, so their support arrangements have more been about bringing respect for Māori values and culture into a government that might otherwise have been hostile than about actively liking National’s policies. While I wouldn’t have picked that tactic myself, as a Pākehā my opinion there doesn’t mean anything, and we do have to acknowledge that, possibly with some credit due to the Māori Party, the National Party has transitioned from Don Brash’s orewa speech to one that embraces Whanau Ora, is actively completing treaty settlements in good faith even if it’s not exactly how Labour would have done them all, is no longer trying to abolish Māori electorates, and is generally no longer completely hostile to Māori interests.

       While I think if you want to protect Māori cultural values and still support a Labour-led government, the Greens are your safest bet, it’s exaggerating to say that the Māori Party will support National ahead of Labour when given the chance, as they never have been before, and they are openly saying they believe their members will give them a mandate to choose Labour if they have the numbers to do so. If I were convinced that the Greens were going to poll under the threshold, the Māori Party would have a fair chance at taking my party vote.
       • tracey 6.1.2.1

         21 September 2017 at 1:09 pm

         Isnt she the LGBTI spokesperson who just publically called Labour out for voting for marriage equality?
         • Matthew Whitehead 6.1.2.1.1

           21 September 2017 at 3:21 pm

           Don’t think so? You’re referring to this story, right? https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/19-09-2017/i-thought-you-had-my-back-marama/

           If so, I point you to this press release: http://www.maoriparty.org/m_ori_party_supports_lgbqti_community

           Seems to be about one of their pacifika candidates going rogue and issuing a press release without their leaders’ consent and passing it off as the party’s view.

           As a queer myself I don’t find it unreasonable that they make this a conscience issue, but I couldn’t give my vote to them if I thought it would be used against other people like me, even if those people are transgender, intersex, or on the asexuality spectrum, queer solidarity is important between different types of minorities.
       • Karen 6.1.2.2

         21 September 2017 at 2:10 pm

         “National would have been the government without their support anyway”

         But they still voted for the selling of state houses – they didn’t need to do that.

         There are several other examples that show they are much more aligned with National now than ever before, and during this campaign they have been spreading lies about Labour with just as much enthusiasm as Stephen Joyce.

         They do consult party members but it is done in a hui – many will not be able to attend and the party line is pushed heavily.

         Marama Fox is a media darling and seems to have persuaded many on the left wing that she is also left-wing at heart, but IMO she is not at trustworthy. Although I am Pākehā, I follow Māori politics closely, and follow a number of Māori working at grass roots level.
         • weka 6.1.2.2.1

           21 September 2017 at 3:15 pm

           Do you think the Mp would vote conservatively against a Labour-led govt?
         • Matthew Whitehead 6.1.2.2.2

           21 September 2017 at 10:06 pm

           Yes, this is the danger of their “support National when we don’t have to” strategy. They get persuaded into voting for things they probably shouldn’t in order to compromise and get concessions out of a government that doesn’t agree with them ideologically, and it’s why I don’t agree with the move tactically even though it has mellowed National on many issues relating to Māori.

           If you don’t trust her, that’s fine. I don’t rely on her to be consistently left-wing or liberal, but to do what she genuinely thinks is best for her people whether it’s ideologically correct or not. As a Green, by and large that agrees with my values anyway, but YMMV. I wouldn’t have called her a media darling, just that she’s frank and opinionated but is also generally an effective communicator in that style, so the media like her because they don’t feel like they’re getting lied to, regardless of whether you believe that’s true or not.

           I’m sure there are disadvantages to the hui format but it is a traditional format for Māori, so you get what you join. I hope they will consult members that can’t attend that way as well, and I do think it’s reasonable to take them at their word that they’ll favour Labour at least this time around, given they’ve never had a chance to choose before.
   • Rosemary McDonald 6.2

     21 September 2017 at 9:24 am

     The Maori Party betrayed disabled Kiwis and their chosen family carers.

     Voted with National for one of the worst pieces of legislation in New Zealand political history.

     Voted with National to remove rights that had been confirmed through the Human Rights Review Tribunal and all the way to the Court of Appeal.

     AND voted with National to remove the right to take the issue back to the Tribunal or the Courts.

     Then…THEN…denied that they voted for that legislation. Pleaded ignorance.

     I know this. I asked Turia …kanohi ki kanohi…and she denied all knowledge of that legislation and her part in getting it over the line.

     Stupid or corrupt?
     • weka 6.2.1

       21 September 2017 at 9:35 am

       What was the legislation?
       • Rosemary McDonald 6.2.1.1

         21 September 2017 at 9:43 am

         This…https://www.pundit.co.nz/content/i-think-national-just-broke-our-constitution

         or

         https://publicaddress.net/onpoint/what-andrew-geddis-said-but-shorter-and-with/
         • weka 6.2.1.1.1

           21 September 2017 at 9:46 am

           So the legislation the Mp voted on was the Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill?
           • Rosemary McDonald 6.2.1.1.1.1

             21 September 2017 at 10:04 am

             Do the links not work weka?

             All will become clear to those with such short memories if you just read the linked to articles.

             FFS…they needed the Maori Party votes to drag that pile of shit over the line.

             Greens, NZF and Labour all kicked up shit on the day.

             The Maori Party…had they any of the conscience that sparked the formation of the party left (remember…the Foreshore and Seabed legislation was going to remove the right to take claims on the issue to court..THAT’S the bit that got Tariana and Co all riled up…not being able to have their claims heard in court)

             I guess if serious disability has not had significant and long term impact on one’s life then that particular outrage will not have stuck in folk’s memories.
             • tracey …

               21 September 2017 at 10:07 am

               “National has a policy of abolishing the Maori seats but as a condition of the Maori Party support on confidence and supply for the past three terms, it has agreed not to pursue it.”

               http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11894212
               • Rosemary McDonald …

                 21 September 2017 at 10:44 am

                 Yes indeedy.

                 I was one of those cheering Tariana on as she crossed the floor all those years ago…

                 https://www.facebook.com/MaoriParty/posts/774138012597354

                 “This is a woman of principles.” I foolishly declared.

                 Then the expedient agreement with National…with the claim that ‘we need to be on the Government benches to achieve gains for Maori.’

                 Well, Tariana (and Te Ureroa, ‘cos you too denied all knowledge of your betrayal of disabled Kiwis and their chosen whanau carers) let me tell you about a couple I know.

                 Maori, worked their arses off all their lives yet still living in a crappy old caravan with no water or toilet, when as a result of surgery for poorly monitored cancer he had a stroke and needed full time support. The hours per week of homebased care (now in a crappy state house in the bronx part of town) they have been allocated has to be paid to someone not living in the home…despite the fact that he only wants his wife to do his cares. They could really, really do with the few extra dollars she’d be paid for doing what anyone else not living at that address would be paid for.

                 And, for fucks sake…Tariana had said a couple of years earlier she supported paying family carers.

                 Confidence and supply? Sure, I get it.

                 But Turia had already demonstrated she had her limits of what she was willing to support…hence her quitting Labour in 2004.

                 Clearly the cripples and their family carers (including Maori) were not worth making a stand for.

                 Hypocrites.
             • weka …

               21 September 2017 at 10:16 am

               I was simply asking for the name of the legislation you referred to. I scanned the links, not going to read the whole of them because I’m busy with other things right now.
               • Rosemary McDonald …

                 21 September 2017 at 10:51 am

                 Sometimes I wonder about you weka.

                 You sometimes comment like you have the handle on disability issues and the struggles of the disability community…then you appear to have forgotten the nastiest piece of legislation ever aimed at our community.

                 The Green Party…especially Catherine Delahunty were staunch advocates on this issue…organised a meeting at the Beehive in 2013 to discuss the legislation.

                 It was BIG…set the NZ legal fraternity abuzz and copped the NZ Government an admonishment from the United Nations.

                 And you seem to have forgotten about it and the involvement of the Maori Party in enabling it.
                 • Karen …

                   21 September 2017 at 11:09 am

                   Catherine Delahunty is a hero when it comes to advocacy on disability issues and I was devastated when she decided not to stand again.
                   • tracey …

                     21 September 2017 at 12:52 pm

                     Agree with this ^^^^^

                     Nicky Wagner perfectly encapsulates National’s response to this highly vulnerable group…

                     Rather be on the water than talking to disability advocatez
                     Skipped the Disability debate attended by all parties
                 • weka …

                   21 September 2017 at 11:11 am

                   FFS, I’m in the middle of researching and writing a post about WINZ. It’s hard work because I’m unwell. I don’t have the time this morning to stop and read two very involved posts about another area of disability. I simply wanted to know the name of the legislation for future reference so that when I have time and space to think about it I will have a reference point.

                   “And you seem to have forgotten about it and the involvement of the Maori Party in enabling it.”

                   No, I haven’t said anything about that, I’ve just asked for the name of the legislation. More than once.

                   And fwiw, my disability affects my memory. I rely on good research skills to keep me up with things, and I often have to do a lot of searching before I comment on things to make sure I have gotten it right. Hence my very straightforward request for some simple information that I could access easily. But if you don’t know the name of the Act, I’m happy to drop the conversation now.
                   • Rosemary McDonald …

                     21 September 2017 at 11:21 am

                     http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2013/0022/latest/whole.html

                     New Zealand Public Health and Disability Amendment Act 2013

                     Part4A

                     “Family care policies
                     “70A Purpose of this Part

                     “(1) The purpose of this Part is to keep the funding of support services provided by persons to their family members within sustainable limits in order to give effect to the restraint imposed by section 3(2) and to affirm the principle that, in the context of the funding of support services, families generally have primary responsibility for the well-being of their family members.

                     “(2) To achieve that purpose, this Act, among other things,—

                     “(a) prohibits the Crown or a DHB from paying a person for providing support services to a family member unless the payment is permitted by an applicable family care policy or is expressly authorised by or under an enactment:

                     “(b) declares that the Crown and DHBs have always been authorised, and continue to be authorised, to adopt or have family care policies that permit persons to be paid, in certain cases, for providing support services to family members:

                     “(c) stops (subject to certain savings) any complaint to the Human Rights Commission and any proceeding in any court if the complaint or proceeding is, in whole or in part, based on an assertion that a person’s right to freedom from discrimination on any of the grounds of marital status, disability, age, or family status (affirmed by section 19 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990) has been breached by—

                     “(i) a provision of this Part; or

                     “(ii) a family care policy; or

                     “(iii) anything done or omitted in compliance, or intended compliance, with this Part or a family care policy.

                     Happy to answer any questions about the legal cases that led to this Act.

                     Also happy to provide link to documents that show that Labour could have and should have sorted this issue before it went to the Human Rights Review Tribunal in 2008.

                     The reason why I voted two ticks Green…Labour’s crocodile tears on the day that legislation was passed failed to move me

                     I still don’t trust them.
                   • tracey …

                     21 September 2017 at 12:55 pm

                     Rosemary

                     Isnt Ruth Dyson still there? I remember her “review” in 06 or 07. So many families put through reproving their disability, worrying if their loved one would be forced to find work that didnt exist. My brother in laws cerebral palsy hadnt been cured but still had to be reviewed and is regularly. Not for increased services but to make sure he hasnt miraculously cured.
   • weka 6.3

     21 September 2017 at 9:34 am

     There’s a huge Maori Party billboard over Waterloo Quay this morning:

     “Labour betrayed Maori.
     Foreshore and Seabed Act.
     Party vote Maori Party.”

     Just fyi…
     

     They have a point.
     • tracey 6.3.1

       21 September 2017 at 10:04 am

       And yet they partnered with the folks who thought F and S didnt go far enough…

       And yesterday Fox apppeated to be chastising Labour for voting for Marriage Equality
       • simonm 6.3.1.1

         21 September 2017 at 12:21 pm

         Fox is a socially conservative Mormon. She sits somewhere to the right of Bill English on same-sex marriage and abortion. She’s pretty much the antithesis of Jacinda, who left the Mormon church because she didn’t agree with it on those issues.
         • tracey 6.3.1.1.1

           21 September 2017 at 12:59 pm

           I was wondering why she tweeted that so vehemently. I wonder how she feels about English and Joyce lying and that English says he now suports gay marriage.

           NZF also plans to recriminalise prostitution.

           Time for young people and younger thinkers to have some power.
     • Karen 6.3.2

       21 September 2017 at 10:51 am

       Not really. There are only three Labour MPs left who voted for that legislation standing in this election. Both Jacinda Ardern and Andrew Little before her and several other Labour MPs have said Labour were wrong. Labour will have between 12 and 14 Māori MPs in their next caucus. It will make it a impossible for legislation like the S & F to go through in the future.

       Ever since Tuku Morgan became president of the Māori Party they have been running a very nasty campaign attacking Labour constantly. Marama Fox has lied repeatedly and I no longer have any respect for her because of this (as well as when she voted for the sale of state houses).

       I will be more than happy if the Māori Party don’t win any seats – then maybe they will get rid of Tuku and reform.
       • Rosemary McDonald 6.3.2.1

         21 September 2017 at 11:02 am

         ” Fox has lied repeatedly and I no longer have any respect for her because of this (as well as when she voted for the sale of state houses).”

         And for her stunning declaration against a CGT on second and third houses…because , like, most Maori own two or three rental properties to supplement their National Super.
     • Brokenback 6.3.3

       21 September 2017 at 1:30 pm

       Where are the activists?

       Such a sign needs to bombed – KUPAPA!
7. One Two 7

   21 September 2017 at 9:12 am

   Polling allowed up until the election

   Banana Republic!
8. cleangreen 8

   21 September 2017 at 9:30 am

   Winston does hold the key to this election as he told anyone who wanted to listen during his interview with John Campbell on ‘checkpoiint’ earlier this week when asked if he would work with a labour/Green Government he said “everythings negociable”

   He said on several occassions (including several public meetings we were at or reviewed live screening of shows he will work with all opposition who want to change the government.

   http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=201858966

   National heard that pleadge from Winston and this week Bill English signalled his reponse of this to a reporter said “in order to have a stable National Governent we have to get rid of the Greens & NZ First.”
   • weka 8.1

     21 September 2017 at 9:33 am

     If you’re going to quote a politician (or anyone) please provide a reference or link. If it’s not a quote, and you are paraphrasing, please make that clear and don’t use quotation marks.
9. cleangreen 9

   21 September 2017 at 9:56 am

   Thanks Weka; I fixed this o/k? ref; please provide a reference or link

   Winston does hold the key to this election as he told anyone who wanted to listen during his interview with John Campbell see link here on ‘checkpoint’ http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player?audio_id=201858966

   This was earlier this week when asked by John if he would work with a labour/Green Government he said clearly everything’s negociable.

   He said this also on several occassions we observed including several public meetings we were either at or that we reviewed live screening of those public meetings such as the Rail debate in Northland last month and we believe he will work with all opposition who want to change the government.

   National obviously heard that pledge from Winston and this week Bill English was signalling his reponse of his distain to MSM when reported saying in order to have a stable National Governent we have to get rid of the Greens & NZ First.

   There is a wide range of possiblities as Weka says correctly here to consider, as a variance of opinion on which way the election will go or where NZ First will go.

   But in my observation Winston wants to get rid of national now.
   • tracey 9.1

     21 September 2017 at 10:09 am

     His new bottom line is no water tax. You reckon that is a guy wanting to side with Labour.
     • Matthew Whitehead 9.1.1

       21 September 2017 at 1:52 pm

       Labour has said they want some means to clean up water and have campaigned on the tax, but that’s not to say they couldn’t either adopt the Greens’ nitrate tax policy instead, (if Peters is good with that) or work out alternative funding mechanisms to clean up waterways that Winston will okay.

       If it comes to negotiations with NZ First, there’ll be either one or two adults in the room, (depending on whether it’s labour-NZF negotiations or Labour&Green-NZF negotiations) and they’ll be able to make it work.
       • tracey 9.1.1.1

         21 September 2017 at 3:13 pm

         So you think he would get all his bottom lines?
         • weka 9.1.1.1.1

           21 September 2017 at 3:17 pm

           Didn’t Peters say the other day he has no bottom lines?
   • weka 9.2

     21 September 2017 at 11:20 am

     I was referring to this,

     and this week Bill English signalled his reponse of this to a reporter said “in order to have a stable National Governent we have to get rid of the Greens & NZ First.”

     You appear to be quoting English, is that right? What’s it from?
     • cleangreen 9.2.1

       21 September 2017 at 3:04 pm

       Hi Weka,
       I heard it mentioned on a radio NZ panel debate this week.

       When a panelist was asked about National going into a coalition.

       He said Bill English mentioned it during a speech he made at a bussness forum he attended.

       Of course Bill would deny it, if he thought it would negatively react on the election.
       • Patricia 9.2.1.1

         21 September 2017 at 8:35 pm

         I’ve been talking to a large group of homeless people this week about the election. Most of the men aren’t even on the roll but the women seem to have organised themselves better and voted early. The men felt that no party cared about them so their vote would not mean much. Maybe next time round we could have a politician or two walk and talk their way around the streets where homeless congregate.
10. roy cartland 10

    21 September 2017 at 11:34 am

    Also remember:
    Poll ignores the undecideds within the Left as a bloc. If you’re going to vote LAB or GRE, but haven’t yet decided which… you’re not represented.

    Poll (as per NZ law) only represents those who haven’t yet voted. Many have already voted, including many more young people and possibly more ‘change’ epople than more traditional, older, status-quo voters.

    The margin of error is such that the numbers could be completely reversed. So it’s meaningless anyway.

    Still feeling the change. And look how many of the left’s issues have been appropriated: water, climate, pollution, poverty, housing, edu, health. In some respects we’ve already won a lot getting these out in the open. Just got to make them happen when we get into power.

    I’m feelin’ it. 🙂
    • james 10.1

      21 September 2017 at 12:10 pm

      “Poll (as per NZ law) only represents those who haven’t yet voted”

      Incirrect.

      The question asked was if a general election was held today who would you vote for. Not who did you vote for.

      The poll included people who have voted.
      • Matthew Whitehead 10.1.1

        21 September 2017 at 1:43 pm

        I have no idea where to fact-check the claim that it’s illegal to poll people who have advance voted. What I know is that it’s illegal to conduct exit polls on election day, but those two things may not be considered legally equivalent.

        I’ve queried CB to see if they even check if people have voted already, and if so do they include them. I assume the answer is either “yes and yes” or “no and don’t know.”
11. katipo 11

    21 September 2017 at 11:38 am

    As number of advanced votes is proportional to the accuracy of final result….
    https://www.libertas.digital/blog/2017/9/20/well-know-whos-won-the-election-at-701pm-thanks-to-advance-voting
    Are these votes counted before the polls close? if so does that mean there are people out there who know these totals before polls close?
    • lprent 11.1

      21 September 2017 at 12:00 pm

      Are these votes counted before the polls close?

      Yes. Starting at midday if they follow their usual practice.

      if so does that mean there are people out there who know these totals before polls close?

      Yes, but there is a reason why talking about certain matters or doing certain things are prohibited on election day. The penalties for violating them can get quite extreme, and the electoral commission and the court system who oversees them tends to take a literal interpretation and don’t stand for fudging the express of implied limitations.

      The electoral act is always fun to read. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0087/122.0/DLM307519.html
12. katipo 12

    21 September 2017 at 12:35 pm

    Cheers, looks like sections 174 C through G is where this info resides.
    Seems a lot at steak and temptation for letting slip the likely final result to someone for ” a fine not exceeding $2,000″
    • Matthew Whitehead 12.1

      21 September 2017 at 1:48 pm

      Most temporary employees for the Electoral Commision are in it because they love democracy. Good luck getting those types to blab. The rest are presumably looking for the extra cash to make ends meet, and thus a $2,000 fine IS a huge disincentive.
      • cleangreen 12.1.1

        21 September 2017 at 4:10 pm

        My concern is the tampering of our paper ballot voting as our investigation of the electoral commission (EC) was all bad for our security because they advised me due
        to rules of the Electoral Act 1993 we apparently have no rights to verify whether our voting paper was altered or not or has been counted correctly and worse nor does the Electoral Commission.

        Here is a copy of their response to our questions a year ago in June 2016;

        Considering The voter cannot know that the vote eventually reported is the same as the vote cast, nor can candidates or others gain confidence in the accuracy of the election by observing the voting and vote counting processes

        Electoral Commission answers;

        • “Because it is a secret ballot it is not possible for either the Commission or the voter to prove one way or the other”?

        • Please provide specific proof and evidence of that; Trust and confidence in the manual parliamentary electoral system is high.

        Electoral Commission said this in June 2016.

        “Trust and confidence in the manual parliamentary electoral system is high.
        The voting papers are the audit trail. The Electoral Act does not provide a process by which a voter can request to see their voting paper after it has been placed in a ballot box. However scrutineers can be present for the entire process. Ballot boxes are sealed until after the close of polls. They are opened in the presence of scrutineers and counted manually. ”

        Our conclussion is;

        Last year in June 2016 the responses below from the electoral commission said that;

        ‘neither the voter nor the electoral office can verify if the vote paper was accurate.’

        So if the voting paper was altered we will never know.

        As to the issue of Electoral Commission stating ;”Trust and confidence in the manual parliamentary electoral system is high.”

        Our conclussion is;

        Due to the lack of either the voter or the Electoral Commission’s abily to provide or to verify if the voting paper was recorded, read or altered or not accurately ‘interperted’ we have less “trust and Confidence ” than Electoral Ccommission state they have.
        • Matthew Whitehead 12.1.1.1

          22 September 2017 at 11:26 pm

          This is part of a single secure ballot system. The only way to keep you free from voter intimidation or vote-buying in such a system is to refuse to verify the integrity of specific ballots. Providing any information in writing to the effect that your ballot wasn’t spoiled technically tells people you cast a valid vote, which they’re not supposed to do.

          There are ways to get around this, but they involve making voting more complicated and using mechanical voting machines, which would make our elections more expensive. (Basically, you cast three votes, two of which “cancel each other out,” and you are allowed to retain a copy of one of the three. Everyone’s copied vote is then made available for public verification, because you can’t know for sure whether it was cancelled out if it was a positive vote, and you can’t know for sure who the uncancelled vote was for if it’s a negative vote)
13. Glenn 13

    21 September 2017 at 1:54 pm

    I know Bolger said “Bugger the polls” but has any Colmar Brunton or Reid poll been completely wrong this close to an election?
    • Matthew Whitehead 13.1

      21 September 2017 at 2:25 pm

      No, if I recall correctly at most the scientific polls have been outside their margin of error for a single party in 2014, which is reasonable given that they are measuring a moving target, and we typically give the 95% confidence level when referring to their margin of error. (ie. you expect only a 5% chance that a 50-50 proposition would be out by more than 3.1%)

      Polls are vulnerable to factors other than statistical uncertainty, like survey timing, limited sample size, (this is why electorate-level polls are less reliable, as they are typically only about 40% the size of party vote polls, which is why they usually report a 4.8% MoE at the 95% confidence level. They also usually take unreasonably long to survey, so if anything significant happens during the survey period the poll becomes skewed) unrepresentative demographics in their sample, (this is why polling companies usually use either quotas or weighting to make their sample “look like” the country demographically) bad wording of questions, the order of questions influencing people’s response, etc…

      The reason I make those graphs though is to show how big an effect the margin of error can have. It can completely change the election outcome. I included a third one which Weka left out because she didn’t quite understand what it covered, where I simulated using random number generation the effect of that margin of error over several hundred MMP elections to see who controlled the winning government, and broke that down into five scenarios. (they were “labour-green government outright, national(-act) government outright, Māori Party is kingmaker, NZF is kingmaker, or one of the two kingmakers has to “cross over” and support the other’s preference. I assumed a NZF preference for National and a MP preference for Labour given that until recently the Labour bloc had been ahead) Add to that the other vulnerabilities, and it’s very important to look at polls in context of the events going on, their relative shift to the previous poll by that organization, and their relative numbers to polls by other organizations for context.

      There are some limitations to that model, (the random numbers are evenly spread rather than concentrated among the middle like they should be, my polling numbers for electorates are unfair to the relevant candidate when a critical race is three-way so I just added 30% to their chances in that case, and my model’s maths assumes small parties can only win one electorate rather than treating chances over 100% as a shot at a second one) but it’s much better at showing you what outcomes are likely than simply looking at the limits of the margin of error, because it’s incredibly unlikely the polls are so skewed that either the most left-wing friendly scenario or the most right-wing friendly scenario will eventuate.
14. Matthew Whitehead 14

    21 September 2017 at 3:01 pm

    I will be doing another two series of graphs tonight when I return from volunteering for the Greens, as we are expecting a Newshub/Reid Research poll tonight. (my stuff is likely to be about 10pm when I start posting, and possibly as late as 12pm before I finish the second thread with my averages, as I use the latest poll’s numbers first. The poll itself will be up by 6:30pm of course) I’ll also post those on my blog so people can tease me later if my averaging technique ends up being completely off, lol.

    (Series one will be on the seats, margins of error, and likely winner for the Newshub poll, series two will be the same for my updated average including that poll)
    • tracey 14.1

      21 September 2017 at 3:14 pm

      Thanks Michael
    • cleangreen 14.2

      21 September 2017 at 3:16 pm

      Matt are you including the last UMR leaked poll too?
      Latest UMR Poll: National 43 Labour 38 NZF 8 Green 7 TOP 2.7
      https://thedailyblog.co.nz/category/most-recent-blogs/
      • cleangreen 14.2.1

        21 September 2017 at 3:43 pm

        Matt here is stuff on the new UMR poll was found firstly here, thanks to Wild Katipo.

        I went to the site at The Daily blog and found feedback on it.

        https://thestandard.org.nz/dame-anne-salmonds-final-brief-election-thought/
        WILD KATIPO 1
        12 comments on “Dame Anne Salmond’s final, brief election thought”
        Comment on post
        WILD KATIPO 1
        21 September 2017 at 12:54 pm
        Latest UMR Poll: National 43 Labour 38 NZF 8 Green 7 TOP 2.7 « The …
        https://thedailyblog.co.nz/…/latest-umr-poll-national-43-labour-38-nzf-8-green-7-top-…

        And yes , – neo liberalism HAS failed , – it always has .

        … ” Neo-liberalism has failed. It’s time to hand over the reins to a new generation, and let them shape the future ” …
        • ianmac 14.2.1.1

          21 September 2017 at 7:31 pm

          clean green That link with the alleged UMR poll doesn’t work. Are ya havin a larf?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS