There is something wrong with the latest Herald Digipoll

Written By: - Date published: 7:00 am, March 21st, 2014 - 99 comments
Categories: Media, newspapers - Tags:

The Herald Digipoll released on Tuesday caused some consternation to the Labour Party. With support dropping below 30% I am sure that more than a few MPs took a deep breath.  But there is something wrong with the figures.

The swing in Auckland was for some strange reason very pronounced.  The Auckland vote for Labour plummeted from 36.6% to 26.7% when the result was compared with the previous Digipoll result in December 2013.  Amongst the rest of the country the result showed a more modest drop from 34% to 31%.  Auckland is traditionally Labour’s strongest area and it seemed strange to me that the fall was so large.

At the same time the Green vote in Auckland almost doubled from 7.3% (which seemed low at the time) to 13.4%.  And New Zealand First crashed from 5.2% to 1.6% even though in the rest of the country it went up from 3.3% to 4.9%.  I appreciate that relying on small samples is always dangerous but it appears that 248 Aucklanders were polled and you would not expect that big a shift in preferences particularly when the rest of the country was fairly stable.

And the really strange thing is that at the same time Aucklanders were polled about Len Brown and the results were published yesterday morning.  And as has been noted by Thomas Lumley the results do not add up.

Even though only 34% of Aucklanders actually voted in the last local body election an impressive 85% of those surveyed claimed to have voted.  And less than one third (31.3%) claimed they had voted for Len even though he enjoyed 46% of the vote.  These are some rather large discrepancies.

David Cunliffe has been quoted as saying that Labour’s internal polling is in the mid 30s.  It looks like this particular poll result was a rogue.

99 comments on “There is something wrong with the latest Herald Digipoll ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. swordfish 1
    21 March 2014 at 7:48 am

    Mickey, I agree with the broad thrust of your argument – that certain aspects of the Herald Digipoll are a little dodgy – but I’d take issue with one or two of your arguments:

    (1) “Auckland is traditionally Labour’s strongest area.”

    If you’re talking about urban Auckland, then I’d have to profoundly disagree. Auckland is traditionally the most Right-leaning of the main cities.

    In 2005, for instance, Auckland was evenly split between Left and Right, Wellington and Chch tilted fairly strongly to the Left, while Dunedin was strongly-to-overwhelmingly Left. In 2008, both Auckland and Chch swung heavily to the Nats, so that the City of Sails (or should that be Sales ?) was tilting fairly strongly Right, Chch (so often in the past Wellington’s political twin) was now evenly split, leaving the Capital (which recorded unusually weak swings to the Nats) still clearly Left-leaning and wonderful Dunedin (one of the few places in NZ I’ve never been to, but have a great deal of time for) still a bastion of the Left. Chch swung heavily to the Nats once again in 2011, so that Auckland and the garden city are now political twins – both fairly strongly Right-leaning – with Wellington and Dunedin now constituting a second pair of twins – both clearly, but not strongly, Left-leaning.

    (2) “It looks like this particular poll result was a rogue.”

    In terms of some of the particulars that you’ve highlighted ?, yes. In terms of the overall result ?, I’m not so sure. It’s roughly in line with the various polls conducted since late January (all but one have Labour in the 30-31 % range). It’s clear that the Nats have experienced a wee spike in support (with late Jan/early Feb being the crucial period when this occurred).

    The key point for me, however, is that the polling patterns from 2008 and 2011 suggest:
    (1) that this spike in Nat support / trough in Lab support won’t last.
    and
    (2) Poll support for not only National but also the Right bloc as a whole (our good Tory chum, Chris73, got this completely wrong a few days ago) is consistently overstated. You can pretty much lob 5-6 points off Nat support and 3-4 points off Right bloc support.

    • karol 1.1
      21 March 2014 at 8:09 am

      I think South and West Auckland are pretty left wing. Central Auckland has become increasingly colonised by the well off, and therefore I would expect it to be increasingly right wing. North Auckland is mostly wealthy, Pakeha and more right wing, although it’s demographic is changing.

      On the digipoll, let’s not forget that in August 2010, just a month or two before the first Auckland supercity election, the digitpoll was seriously inaccurate. It had Brown and Banks neck and neck on 28-29% each.

      The final result was a clear win for Brown with 48.7% of the votes and Banks losing with 35.1% of the votes.

      • swordfish 1.1.1
        21 March 2014 at 8:43 am

        Yeah, Karol, but I’m talking about Auckland as a whole – compared to Wellington, Chch and Dunedin as a whole.

        South Auckland certainly is a bastion for the Left – as Red as a Railway Shed. The various seats of West Auckland and Central Auckland are (taken collectively) mildy Left-leaning (‘marginal Left’, if you like), while both the East Auckland and North Shore seats are overwhelmingly Right – I mean, as bloody Blue as a New Tatoo. There are suburbs like Browns Bay and Mellons Bay where they still burn Green supporters as witches. (Think Monty Python’s Holy Grail – “We’ve got a witch, we’ve got a witch !!!”. “How do you know she is a witch ?”. “She’s wearing a Green Party rosette.” (The good burghers of Mellons Bay, screaming in frenzied anger): “Burn Her !!!, Burn Her !!!”.

        • mickysavage 1.1.1.1
          21 March 2014 at 9:39 am

          You might be right swordfish. Certainly South Auckland was a stand out performer last election. My calculations were that the Auckland result last time was far better than the national result in that the swing was much smaller and in South Auckland there was a swing back.

          Dunedin and Christchurch both had huge swings to the right, 10%+ increases for National. Will hunt down the figures and post them when I find them.

        • Tracey 1.1.1.2
          21 March 2014 at 9:43 am

          LOLOLOLOLOLOL “it’s a fair cop”

        • mickysavage 1.1.1.3
          21 March 2014 at 10:16 am

          Found the figures:

          In 2011 the party votes for Labour as a percentage of total votes cast were:

          Dunedin 28.50%
          Christchurch 26.75%
          Wellington 25.45%
          Auckland 29.93%
          Country 27.48%

          • swordfish 1.1.1.3.1
            21 March 2014 at 1:10 pm

            Danke Schoen, Mickey.

            My detailed figures are at home (and, presently, I’m not) so I’ll get back to you here tonight or tomorrow morning. It’s possible the strength of the Left bloc as a whole in Wellington and Dunedin and its comparative weakness in Auckland has led me to wrongly assume Labour is weaker in the latter. If I have made such a boo-boo then clearly it’s mea culpa time. But I’ll need to check.

            In terms of the swing back to Lab in South Auckland in 2011 – true, but probably largely 2008 NZ Pacific Party supporters. Although (from memory), the Party-Vote in West Auckland remained fairly static, it’s clear that a number of individual suburbs swung back towards the Left in 2011, particularly in Cunliffe’s New Lynn seat. Good to see in an election where Labour continued to slide elsewhere.

            Regarding Dunedin, need to make a firm distinction between DNorth (very similar to Wellington City in its unusually high Green support and comparatively weak swings to the Nats) and DSouth – which has experienced significant Lab-to-Nat swings over the last 2 elections (shockingly so in the far south-west – Green Island, Burnside, Concord, Abbotsford. Christ knows what’s going on there. Some would, no doubt, de-Clare).

            • mickysavage 1.1.1.3.1.1
              21 March 2014 at 2:38 pm

              I don’t think we are disagreeing swordfish but I am concentrating on the immediate past election whereas you are talking about trends over a longer period. Certainly Christchurch and Dunedin used to be strongholds and I agree that Auckland is a mixed bag.

              South Auckland’s 2011 results were helped because Taito Philip Field’s party had disappeared.

              • Enough is Enough …
                21 March 2014 at 2:51 pm

                Big swing to the left in latest Roy Morgan

                March 13-26, 2014

                http://www.roymorgan.com/morganpoll/new-zealand/voting-intention-summary

                • lprent …
                  21 March 2014 at 3:10 pm

                  Bounces around a bit. In this case National down by ~3.0% Greens up by ~3.5%. No other significiant changes.

                  • thechangeling …
                    21 March 2014 at 3:16 pm

                    How come the Roy Morgan polling period says March 13-26 when it’s still only March 21st today?

                  • swordfish …
                    21 March 2014 at 4:46 pm

                    Yep, bounces around. But, still, that’s the first time the Nats have dipped below 48 % since late Jan. See, I said these little spikes don’t last !!! Wonder what DPF has to say ? Given his Herald Digipoll post (March 18) entitled Mr Cunliffe the poll trend doesn’t lie.

                    It’ll be interesting to see the next series of polls. When you analyse monthly poll averages for previous election years (and, indeed, for 2012 and 2013) as I’ve done, you see immediately that significant surges or declines for either bloc never last.

                    So, let’s be clear: The Left have everything to play for this year. Still very much in the game.

                    • McFlock …
                      21 March 2014 at 5:14 pm

                      There was one RM cycle that was really suspicious a year or so back: 3 lab statics/advances, then a 4-5% drop, repeated pretty regularly over a couple of years.

                      That screams a methodological issue to me.

                      But most of the bounce from RM poll to poll is simple sampling error. Then the bounces between say RM and fairfucked include genuine practical methodological issues, sampling error, and possibly a bit of (sub/)conscious bias (which one should never rule out as a possibility).

                      Reporters are some of the worst chicken littles, fluttering from crisis to crisis to dramatic resurgence, but politically it’s the trends that are important. And the trend with the largest granules is that such polls have gone from mostly “Nats can govern alone” to pinging quite a few “too close to call” or “labgrn ahead” results.

                      One merely needs to regard it all with a certain philosophical elan, and maybe head to the election saying something cool like “Today is a good day to Diet“. 🙂

                    • lprent …
                      21 March 2014 at 9:05 pm

                      I tend to look on the 6-8 week averages because there is simply too much noise in the smaller samples. There has been very little movement overall

                • thechangeling …
                  21 March 2014 at 3:11 pm

                  Blimey, it really is neck and neck still after all.
                  NZ First will be king maker.

                • McFlock …
                  21 March 2014 at 3:17 pm

                  March 13-26, 2014

                  lol
                  I know the polls are rigged, but that’s ridiculous 🙂

                  I see they’ve corrected it back to march 03-16.

                  A wee chuckle on a Friday afternoon…

                  edit: snap TC. They probably use a template and the web tech tweaked the month but not the dates from the previous feb report 🙂

      • Tracey 1.1.2
        21 March 2014 at 9:43 am

        not papakura 😉

        • You_Fool 1.1.2.1
          21 March 2014 at 11:29 am

          Or Franklin. But both are much more rural electorates than the urban electorates in Manukau

          • swordfish 1.1.2.1.1
            21 March 2014 at 1:16 pm

            True Tracey and You_Fool. But I certainly wouldn’t include Hunua (which replaced Franklin quite some time ago) in South Auckland, while Papakura is kind of half and half.

  2. Tracey 2
    21 March 2014 at 7:54 am

    The thing about the len brown poll for me is this…

    it’s all very well polling auckland voters on him but to be more accurate you need to find aucklanders whoa ctually bother to vote.

    it seems in auckland everyone has an opinion on our mayor and council but only about a third fill in their voting forms.

    not saying brown will get in next time, I personally dont think he will and he won’t get my vote. Not because of his affair as such but because I do expect honesty and integrity in my representatives, I deal with liars every day in my work, and I vote accordingly. If people continue to vote for people who lack honesty and integrity, guess what? They get representatives who behave contrary to honesty and integrity.

    I found his head in the sand over the POA annoying and while I know he is cosying up to Key to get more money for public transport in Auckland I think he let’s his ego override some of his thinking parts.

    I find it baffling that Labour polling is so low BUT I recall Cunliffe’s economic announcement to the BRT was on the lower right of p21 of the herald the next day, so most people wont even know he has one.

    • Clemgeopin 2.1
      21 March 2014 at 10:24 am

      It is appalling that our MSM, (TV and Newspapers) gave barely any notice/publicity to the Labour’s economic and forestry policy announcements. That is unfair and unjust. It is election year. The MSM is in the business of publishing news and information to the public so that they could make informed decisions. I think the MSM has been callous and prejudiced against Labour policy announcements so far.

      • Ron 2.1.1
        21 March 2014 at 2:11 pm

        Why is that so surprising. The media you mention is owned by right wing people and their respective papers/TV stations reflect that view. The exception if probably TV1 which while being state owned has a board that looks like a National Party Branch meeting
        People by newspapers to put forward a point of view. I have no idea why a group of left leaning people do not set up their own paper and spread the news as they see it. Ditto with radio/tv stations.
        Just about every other western country has some form of left wing media. If we get a Labour government then I would hope that they will do something to redress the imbalance in MSM but they won’t of course.

        It is appalling that our MSM, (TV and Newspapers) gave barely any notice/publicity to the Labour’s economic and forestry policy announcements.

        • Clemgeopin 2.1.1.1
          21 March 2014 at 2:45 pm

          A certain amount of fault actually lies with the Labour organisation and leadership as well because some mismanagement and mistakes, though minor, have been made so far and their so far publicised good policies have not been constantly refereed to in their interviews, communications etc. The public are not well aware of these policies yet.

    • Ant 2.2
      21 March 2014 at 11:00 am

      Anecdotally lots of people I know don’t think he should resign but still no longer support him, this included dyed in the wool left leaning southsiders. The left should be looking for a new candidate in Auckland, all it will take is a solid centre rightwing candidate and he is gone – talk is of people like Lester Levy representing the right.

      Brown’s behaviour that people wrote off as eccentric before the affair now makes him look like a slightly creepy weirdo.

    • Populuxe1 2.3
      21 March 2014 at 2:13 pm

      I don’t think the anomalous Len Brown results are all that weird. People tend to tell fibs to people talking to them on the phone because unconsciously they want to be liked and approved of – they are only thinking in terms of talking to an individual, not being part of a poll. So yes, they’ll lie and say they voted because not to have voted would look bad, and Len Brown has made a fool of th epeople who voted for him, so not wanting to appear to be a fool, they’ll lie about that too.

      • lprent 2.3.1
        21 March 2014 at 2:21 pm

        So what you’re saying is that polls aren’t particularly useful in themselves. I told everyone that a long time ago.

        Trends of a series of polls from the same company are of a bit of interest.

        But trying regularly jump from a poll results to “this is what it means for the makeup of parliament” is just the sure sign of someone having a quick public self-satisfied mastubatory relief (and which should have just as much attraction to anyone who observes it). As is anyone in NZ’s polling desert of looking at polls of polls from different companies. As far as I can tell statistically, that just means that errors tend to magnify.

        😈

      • mickysavage 2.3.2
        21 March 2014 at 2:34 pm

        The results are weird in that they do not match reality. The Auckland sample people questioned were also asked questions about Len and their responses to the did you vote for Len questions showed either that a number of them were fibbing or that they were not a representative sample. Either way you have to question whether or not they are representative of Auckland opinion.

  3. captain hook 3
    21 March 2014 at 8:04 am

    where is wail boil getting the money to pay off digipoll?

  4. weizguy 4
    21 March 2014 at 8:14 am

    Where can I find the actual poll? Are the additional questions (Len Brown, Flag) asked at the same time (more importantly, are they asked before?). How much effect might that have about how people respond to the later questions?

  5. ScottGN 5
    21 March 2014 at 8:28 am

    It was interesting too that Audrey Young felt compelled to write a whole column defending the Digipoll after David Cunliffe had the temerity to suggest it was at odds with Labour’s internal polling. I hate to sound like a mad conspiracy theorist but it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that the Herald decided to poll at exactly the same time Cunliffe was dealing with the election trust issues.

    • Anne 5.1
      21 March 2014 at 9:52 am

      The other way round ScottGN. Digipoll chose their polling days to coincide with Cunliffe dealing with the election trust allegations. In other words, they know what is expected of them. I have long been of the view that National will time their allegations (especially when they’ve been sitting in Key’s top drawer for some time) when they know a sympathetic polling company is about to poll. The Herald played its part by burying Cunliffe’s economic announcements on page 21 the following day.

      I think it can be safely claimed that Digipoll are not as objective in their polling techniques as those used by other media outlets and political parties. The fact they consistently over estimate National’s poll ratings and have done so for years has to be considered suspect. That is not to say that occasionally their findings may fit in with other polling companies, but it’s my observation it is a fairly rare occurrence.

      • Tracey 5.1.1
        21 March 2014 at 9:58 am

        Who loves polls the most? Who hates the idea of not having them at all or even for 3 months prior to an election? Once you answer those questions you see who they serve.

        It’s NOT about educating the masses on different political options.

  6. dv 6
    21 March 2014 at 8:34 am

    There is ONE thing that really annoys me about poll reporting is the reporting of the % to 1dp

    It is absolute BB

    (There is more than one thing actually)

  7. Sanctuary 7
    21 March 2014 at 8:52 am

    The Herald’s reporting of the Collin’s affair vs. it’s reporting of on Cunliffe’s trust are the absolute gold standard for the right wing political bias of that paper. Cunliffe’s trumped-up charges were the subject of an on-going string of sharply critical articles over a two week period, full of uninformed speculation couched as a story (“Is Labour in crisis?”), hectoring lectures from Audrey Young (fresh from her papers near daily hagiographies of the ACT party) and now dodgy polls and an article repeating baseless speculation from – of all people – Matthew Hooton that look very much like an orchestrated attempt to sow in the public mind a narrative that Labour is in disarray.

    By contrast, Collins got a bit of bad PR for a couple of days with some restrained stories and nice admiring “Collins doesn’t know the word ‘defeat’” headline from John Armstrong by way of rehabilitation. Expect Parata to get similar softly softly treatment now Key has signalled she is not going to be sacked.

    The Herald’s editorial agenda is clear – they have set out to nobble Labour’s chances of victory in the general election before the campaign even gets started by running an actively pro-National disinformation campaign.

    • Bearded Git 7.1
      21 March 2014 at 9:17 am

      Quite right Sanctuary-there has been an orchestrated (Hooton, Farrar and friends) attempt to paint Labour in disarray where this is simply not true.

      For instance the Herald ran a poll on Labour asking can it recover (from a dodgy poll result!) where one option was something like “no Labour is in a mess and cannot recover”.

      This is “no I have never beaten my wife” stuff. Total bias.

    • Ant 7.2
      21 March 2014 at 9:41 am

      The media also insists on enabling John Key to act like a cross between an exasperated dad whose hands are tied and a disinterested spectator that they’ve just gotten to provide comment on a story – not the leader of the National Party and PM who is ultimately responsible for these screw ups.

    • Tracey 7.3
      21 March 2014 at 9:45 am

      and cunliffe’s economic policy announcement made page 21 of their next edition… bottom right…

      • Mainlander 7.3.1
        21 March 2014 at 2:14 pm

        I sure hope page 21 was the last page if not it should have been further back it made that much sense

    • RedLogix 7.4
      21 March 2014 at 9:58 am

      Yes. All of us who have been paying attention have a pretty clear idea now of how these disinformation campaigns work.

      Which should give us something of a clue as to how to break them.

      • Tracey 7.4.1
        21 March 2014 at 10:18 am

        it seems to counter them you either have to have money to advertise and billboard the crap out of them or have such an amazing on the ground presence… pretty sure the second is how Clark got through the Shipley regime

  8. Chooky 8
    21 March 2014 at 9:12 am

    why dont people organise a BOYCOTT of the Herald?….terminate their subscriptions( with the reason of NACT bias and unfair reporting and journalism)

    …or boycott it on the news stands… or plaster red ‘danger bias’ or ‘enemy of the people’ stickers on it in cafes/libraries where it is available for a free read

    …refuse to advertise in it ( and give them the reasons)

    …..in other words HIT IT where it hurts the most in its pocket

    (….these days you can get your news elsewhere for free…my newspaper often remains unwrapped)

    • Enough is Enough 8.1
      21 March 2014 at 9:22 am

      Chook most of those advertising are Capitalists ….those people who vote and love National.

    • Tracey 8.2
      21 March 2014 at 9:46 am

      I took up their free one month subscription and promise of a follow up interview so that I can tell them why i stopped subscribing some years ago and would rather poke my eyes out with a fork than pay them a single cent for it. I shall point them to the ODT as one of my favourite online reads each day, sans Auckland issues of course.

    • Jason 8.3
      21 March 2014 at 11:21 am

      Hi Chooky,

      Got a call from Herald to subscribe to their paper. Had received a 2 week free trial. Told the guy too right wing for me, no thanks.

  9. Tom Gould 9
    21 March 2014 at 9:13 am

    A rogue? Some might say doctored? Who knows? The Herald is running a pretty virulent anti-Labour campaign. They seem to have simply abandoned any pretence of the old fashioned “fair, balanced and accurate” media ethos and moved their content to match their paper stock: full tabloid. It has now reached the point where the Herald needs to be considered a publication of the National Party. On that basis, we can take it for what it is, and rely on other media for “news”. The paper has become irrelevant beyond its role as a National Party newsletter.

    • Populuxe1 9.1
      21 March 2014 at 2:17 pm

      Nah – people never tell the truth to pollsters. They don’t want to feel judged

  10. Macro 10
    21 March 2014 at 9:22 am

    Seems obvious that when asked of their political opinion over the phone – people don’t always tell the truth – and why should they – nosey bastards! Furthermore, it seems pretty obvious from the Brown result that there was a good amount of push polling in this one i.e. the Herald getting the answer they wanted.
    So all one can say about the validity of the Herald digiPoll is that it is rubbish.

  11. tricledrown 11
    21 March 2014 at 9:29 am

    11% undecided voters .
    What was the previous undecided % .
    This time of the electoral cycle its usually a higher % of undecided.
    This is only a telephone survey landlines only.
    When you look at Lens pre election poll vs actual result.
    The number of people Now relying on just cell phones Now will be a very signifigant especially in poorer houses labour green supporters.
    Even with this latest herald poll the undecided vote is still more than Enough to have National worried.

    • swordfish 11.1
      21 March 2014 at 12:41 pm

      “What was the previous undecided %”

      For the Herald Digipoll – 12.6 % in previous (Dec 2013) and 8.6 % in one before that (Sep 2013).

  12. Jan 12
    21 March 2014 at 9:33 am

    And, and, and guess what – you could fill in that poll on what people thought of Labour’s “problems ” over and over and over again – another doctored poll!

  13. anker 13
    21 March 2014 at 9:34 am

    I love the idea of a boycott of the Herald. It could be just for the print paper (where most of their adds are) so we can keep an idea of what trype they are writing on stuff.

    I have yet to hear back from the Editor of The Herald re my two complaints one of an article of Fran O’Sullivans and one Claire Trevett, so its off to the Press Council for a formal complaint.

    Seriously though a boycott would be great. Whose in?

  14. Blue 14
    21 March 2014 at 9:35 am

    Herald DodgyPolls are pretty much always out of whack with the more reliable polls, such as Roy Morgan. They have a smaller sample size and seemingly some significant flaws in methodology. They tend to heavily overestimate support for National.

    I find it incredible that on the basis of just one poll the Herald feels justified in dragging Labour through the mud, with their puffed-up imbeciles writing garbage suggesting that Labour is doomed and implying Cunliffe should be sacked, but can’t be because of the new rules.

    Then we have news headlines today screaming that Shane Jones is leaving Labour, and why? Because Matthew Hooten consulted his butt and wrote an article about it. Since when is Hooten’s opinion considered news?

    Every year the standard of our MSM gets worse.

    • HG 14.1
      21 March 2014 at 11:20 am

      Roy Morgan a reliable poll!? You have to be joking mate!! Roy Morgan is well known for manipulating poll results to generate media interest.

      • james 14.1.1
        21 March 2014 at 11:39 am

        HG – Really. They have often been mentioned as the most reliable poll from people on this blog (untill poor results started coming thru that is).

        Anyway – any evidence that they have “manipulating poll results” or is this just what you believe under the tin foil hat?

        [lprent: You’re lying about me. So you are banned for two weeks.

        RM are “reliable” because they poll about every two weeks. That is about 24 times per year. Whereas each of the other polls in NZ do it about 9 or 10 times per year is they are lucky. Therefore with a higher frequency you can see the poll trend lines more easily. They also are known to poll some cellphones which helps with areas like Auckland that are sparse on landlines in many suburbs. You can find numerous comments and post about this subject by me.

        If you want to make general statements about this site, then I’d suggest that you read the policy because you’ll find you are talking to and about me as a grumpy sysop with a propensity to banning mumpties like yourself who waste my time. I find this has a salutary effect on debate because it makes moronic fools like yourself have to give up lying by assertions about abstract groups.

        I’d suggest that you direct your comments to specific other people and it often pays to link to examples if you want to continue commenting. ]

        • Enough is Enough 14.1.1.1
          21 March 2014 at 12:06 pm

          Ummmm the fact they have National ahead should be enough evidence for you James.

          Do you honestly think that with the dicontent in New Zealand and massive unemployment that National are in reality popular.

          • McFlock 14.1.1.1.1
            21 March 2014 at 2:55 pm

            Well, I wanted to believe the same thing as you in 2011.

            Herald might be bunk – almost always is. But RM have a regular enough cycle to look at trends. Whether you want to bump a crude error adjust above or below those lines is up to you, as long as you have some logical basis for the extent of the adjustment.

  15. Tigger 15
    21 March 2014 at 11:41 am

    I polled two people and they both said John Key is a flesh puppet with a tiny maggot-alien controlling him from his brain. So it must be true.

  16. chris73 16
    21 March 2014 at 12:03 pm

    Absolutely right, theres nothing wrong with Labour so whatever you do DON’T (sorry for the capital letters but its really important) change anything, just keep on doing what you’re doing 🙂

  17. Cancerman 17
    21 March 2014 at 1:01 pm

    The poll may well be “roguish” but taken with all other poll it does fit a trend and these can’t be ignored.
    In regards to Auckland that drop does appear too big and think will correct in future polls but I think David’s gaffe over the “house attack” did really annoy many Aucklanders who are struggling to afford housing, and these are the Aucklanders who vote Labour as the National Auckland voters love these house price rises.

  18. yabby 18
    21 March 2014 at 3:04 pm

    On the number of digi-polled people who claim to have voted.

    I think the whole Herald polling methodology is fraught with so many issues to be remotely relevant, but I have no problem believing that 85% of those who responded voted, or claim to have voted. This is because people who take the trouble to read and vote in polls are politically inclined and most Herald online readers would be in that category.

  19. mickysavage 19
    21 March 2014 at 3:08 pm

    And the latest Roy Morgan is out with Labour on 31.5%, National 45.5% Greens 14% NZ First 3.5%. Back to stalemate …

  20. captain hook 20
    21 March 2014 at 3:13 pm

    Anybody with an historical bent should check out the piccy of Harry Truman when the yellow press printed the morning edition saying he had lost when he had won.

  21. Clemgeopin 21
    21 March 2014 at 4:19 pm

    Based on the published polls so far, my own estimate of the election night party vote result
    will be close to these figures I think:

    NATIONAL……42.6 %
    LABOUR………33.1 %
    GREENS……….11.5 %
    NZF…………….06.3 %
    CONS………….02.4 %
    MAORI………..01.6 %
    MANA………….01.0 %
    ACT…………….00.3 %
    UF………………00.2 %
    OTHERS………..01.0 %

    • McFlock 21.1
      21 March 2014 at 4:40 pm

      I think you need to factor in the media smelling blood on the campaign.

      If it becomes obvious to the people that labour really are toast, look for another sub-30 labour result. On the other hand, if national start to bleed, the media will lay into them (on the grounds that they might not have a tory govt, but at least they’ll keep their ratings/circulation in the next term), and national will go to mid thirties or worse. And it’s in the media’s interests to tout a “landslide” victory, whomever wins. Drama sells news.

      So I reckon it’s unlikely to be as close as 2011 – but I still think it’s too far out to see which way the swing goes. Beginning of september would be a more realistic time to make predictions.

      • Clemgeopin 21.1.1
        21 March 2014 at 5:12 pm

        This is NOT the final prediction, but TRUE if election is held today, based on the existing published polls.
        Obviously my ‘prediction’ will change when new polls are published.

    • Bearded Git 21.2
      21 March 2014 at 4:56 pm

      Maori Party dead in the water now Flavell has says he will go with National.

      All Green and Labour voters should vote Mana in the Maori seats. The result will be an overhang where Mana gets more seats than it’s party vote and those overhang seats will go to the left.

      • felix 21.2.1
        21 March 2014 at 5:57 pm

        When did Flavell say that, BG?

        • karol 21.2.1.1
          21 March 2014 at 6:06 pm

          RNZ. Flavell said Maori Party most likely to go with the major party with the most votes.

          RNZ

          3 News

          • Colonial Viper 21.2.1.1.1
            21 March 2014 at 6:28 pm

            Whichever big party can deliver the baubles of office is good enough for Flavell.

            Inspirational principle from the Maori Party.

          • felix 21.2.1.1.2
            21 March 2014 at 7:34 pm

            Thanks karol.

            Pretty cowardly of him I reckon, saying he’ll go with National if they’re the single biggest party. He knows they’ll be the single biggest party. Everyone knows that.

            It’s like me saying I’ll have a donut for breakfast but only if gravity still exists in the morning.

            Just be honest Mr Flavell and admit you’re having a donut because you want a donut.

            • Bearded Git 21.2.1.1.2.1
              21 March 2014 at 8:49 pm

              Ha ha that’s right Felix. But I do think we should be spreading the word on the fact that Lab/Gre should vote Mana in the Maori electorate seats (while obviously party voting Lab/Gre)

              Thanks for explaining Flavell’s position Karol.

              • felix …
                22 March 2014 at 8:08 am

                Indeed BG, you’re onto it.

                Voters in Maori seats need to know that the maori Party are absolutely definitely going with National, so don’t gamble on them again.

                Now I’m off to get that donut

      • Clemgeopin 21.2.2
        21 March 2014 at 10:16 pm

        I too think that due to Flavell’s National favouring statement, their support will fall a little, but I am not sure if that falling support will go to Mana or Labour. I think Labour. I also think that Hone will win his electorate vote easily and may be one other Mana electorate member (Annette Sykes ?).

  22. Ad 22
    21 March 2014 at 5:39 pm

    Support for the Labour Party has risen slightly to 31.5% (up 1%), the Greens have jumped to 14% (up 3.5%), New Zealand First 3.5% (down 1%), Mana Party 0% (down 0.5%), Conservative Party of NZ 1.5% (down 1%) and Internet Party (0%, unchanged) while support for Others is 1% (up 1%).

    Latest Roy Morgan

  23. anker 23
    21 March 2014 at 7:06 pm

    Yes just come across the RM poll. I was reading aa article about this crap about Jones going to NZ first and there was a headline at the bottom of that article. I thought I was hallucinating! Where were the heading on stuff, Left v Nats its neck and neck??? Nothing. Yet when the polls show Labour doing badly, its blazoned all over stuff. Maybe they want to keep it quiet???

    • Bearded Git 23.1
      21 March 2014 at 8:54 pm

      Exactly anker. But if the left can get such a reasonable poll result with all this crap being thrown against them in the MSM imagine how good the polls will look in 6 months after a good election campaign. And Cunners is the man!

  24. anker 24
    21 March 2014 at 10:28 pm

    Just checked the Heralds new website. Clicked on National, clicked on politics.

    Absolutely nothing about the latest RM poll! WTF

    • Clemgeopin 24.1
      21 March 2014 at 10:47 pm

      Just shows that it is a pro right prejudiced non balanced news controlling newspaper.

  25. finbar. 25
    22 March 2014 at 2:23 am

    The knowing of the polls,is land line question,a cover of land line users.No youth or their mind will have been questioned in the valley of the elections win.Only will old phone table result in the questions.The winner in the race,is the one that can capture our youths arrogant ignorance of superiority of what, are yous going to do for us you lying bunch of users.

    Our youth does understand that.

  26. finbar. 26
    22 March 2014 at 2:36 am

    Cunliffe is not your open shirt this is me.He is and looks uncomfortable in his new look.Cunliffe should be left to shine in his cloths,that are comfortable to him,not some,this is the way to look and dress.Cunliffe should let his personality shine,and questioned about our lands finances, and direction, his care and knowing will shine.

Links to post