Talk Elections

I'm sure I remember a thread for this election; but it appears to have vanished into the æther.

The Labour leader David Cunliffe is in deep sh**t. A risky pick (opposed by the caucus), he has not quite turned Labour's fortunes around. Recently he labelled members of his party that don't support him as scabs; and his anti-crony capitalism platform was undermined by a leaked letter supporting a controversial Chinese businessman gain citizenship.

Fairfax Ipsos have recently released this astonishing poll:

National : 56.5
Labour: 23.2
Green: 11.9
NZ First: 3.2 (below threshold)

That would be the worst and best results in their party's histories for Labour and National respectively. National could sit very comfortably in a majority.

Also ACT's one MP has resigned in disgrace (no by-election though), the Maori electorates are due for abolition (but not before the election I think?) and the Greens support remain constant.

Frodo created a "who would you vote for" thread on the Individual Politics board. I don't think there ever was a NZ 2014 general election thread.

How did Labour manage to get that unpopular?

Fairfax-Ipsos usually has a pretty hefty National lean compared to other firms, but, yeah, Cunliffe has blown it.

Lol I'm a dumbarse

Why does New Zealand poll like a FPTP country despite having MMP? Take National's phenomenal result. They completely own the right. One would think that ACT/Conservatives/NZ First would be polling reasonably well, but they aren't. How have they managed to keep free marketeers/the religious right/the anti-immigration types in the tent?

Because the many new parties of the right and centre-but-lol-actually-right of the 1990s were run by crooks and lunatics.

Sure, but that still doesn't really explain why there hasn't been any serious competition to the Nationals.

Generally its difficult to keep the centre-right united in a non-FPTP system, so "How have they managed to keep free marketeers/the religious right/the anti-immigration types in the tent?" is an interesting question.

There was. Look at elections from a decade ago.

Yeah, 2002 is 17,5% for ACT and NZ First combined, but by serious I was refering to a non-clown/crook/lunatic challenge.

I suppose you could say that the Nats have been lucky being challenged by low quality opponents, but that is in itself an interesting fact.

Very New Zealand though. I have immense affection for the country (and have relatives there), but they elected Robert Muldoon as their Prime Minister once. And, worse, re-elected him.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11287736
 (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11287736)
Cunliffe makes a speech, which seems pretty passionate, but contains a gaffe - of sorts - that can be taken momentously out of context: that he is "sorry to be a man".

He also has ruled out having any Internet-Mana politicians as ministers.

On a bright side, Labour has jumped up to its last election numbers in the last three polls. Of course, that can hardly be claimed to be "fantastic news".

Writ day tomorrow.

Safe national.

Quite probably, but a big political scandal has just broken...

I've heard. Not nearly big enough to make Cunliffe Labour electable though, surely.

John Key's been a good Prime Minister and his government's been a good government. They deserve to be reelected.

Why is he (apparently) so extremely popular?

Just when you think everything is straightforward...

The universe finds a way... (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/23/-sp-new-zealand-election-john-key-alleged-dirty-politics)

Meh, it's the Guardian, they operate by providing a rose-tinted view of the world for liberal leftists. Dig deep in the article and find

I read that, but these things take time to settle in.

"liberal-leftists" seriously? Let's lift the discourse please.

But more of the time, people don't care about politicians' spats, especially when the method of revelation (hacking) lends itself to accusations of moral equivalence. I don't think liberal or leftist are derogatory terms, and I think they describe the Guardian's audience pretty well.

Although they might not care about the spats themselves, the struggles of a politician getting out of such a scandal is dangerous. They inevitably wriggle and perjure themselves; and, especially in an electoral campaign where the Key government wants to highlight its record, the scandal starts to dominate headlines and define politicians. Similar to "Bridgegate" in the US, a petty action can balloon into a nightmare for Christie. These sort of campaigns run the risk of slowly dragging on and on, which is basically the worst thing to happen to a politician. Key has already dealt with the Minister for Justice's troubles in a remarkably inept way, which shows some incompetence the media and opposition would love to exploit more.

Now, we just wait and see how soft Key's support is. Though the Nationals are almost assured a plurality, this scandal brings the hopes of crushing majorities from July down. Perhaps we might see some weird tactical voting from Labour/Greens for NZ First to ensure they remain above threshold, and force a minority government.

Typical Grauniad...

http://www.3news.co.nz/politics/decision14/latest-political-poll-big-blow-for-john-key (http://www.3news.co.nz/politics/decision14/latest-political-poll-big-blow-for-john-key)

Conservatives close to threshold at 4.6%. NZ First over the line, despite dumping Asenati (which she said smacked of racism). Also Maori hold two seats, I wonder which two they think Maori will win? 63% believe Minister Collins should step down.

Important to note that Labour are also down by a greater margin than the Nationals.

And there's a debate today which will be Cunliffe's one and only chance.

Last three polls:

Roy Morgan: Nat 48, Labour 27.5, Greens 11.5, (Left 39),  NZF 6.5, IM 2, MP 1, Con 1, ACT 0.5, UFNZ 0.5
Herald-DigiPoll: Nat 50, Labour 25.2, Greens 13.7, (Left 38.9), NFZ 4.3, Con 2.6, IM 2.1, MP 0.7, ACT 0.6, UFNZ 0.4
3NNR: Nat 45, Labour 26.4, Greens 13.5, (Left 39.9), NZF 6.3, Con 4.6, IM 2.1, UFNZ 0.4, ACT 0.3

_{Polling in New Zealand has historically tended to overestimate the Nationals and the Greens and to underestimate Labour and the minor parties (this should not be read as a prediction). There is also a tendency for different companies to produce wildly different figures. Additionally it should be noted that Fairfax-Ipsos tends to be very National leaning and that Roy Morgan can be highly volatile.}

Labour sinking lower in latest Herald Digipoll. (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11315586) NZ First are over the threshold.

National 50.7 (up 0.7)

Labour 24.1 (down 1.1)

Greens 11.4 (down 2.3)

NZ First 5 (up 0.7)

Maori Party 1 (up 0.3)

Internet Mana 3.4 (up 1.3)

Conservatives 3.3 (up 0.7)

Act 0.3 (down 0.3)

United Future 0.2 (down 0.2)

At the level of support that Internet-MANA is receiving now, John Minto would enter parliament (assuming honawira keeps his seat). 

Collins resigns as Minister, but still contesting Papakura.
http://tvnz.co.nz/vote-2014-news/judith-collins-resigns-minister-cabinet-6067680 (http://tvnz.co.nz/vote-2014-news/judith-collins-resigns-minister-cabinet-6067680)

Labour is continuing to sink lower in all three polls out today. (http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/253816/third-poll-puts-national-well-in-front)

It appears as if the scandals have actually helped the Nationals, and that NZ First will make it into the next parliament.

So are we going to start thinking about predictions?

I can make one that seems to constantly verify these days : this election's outcome is gonna be awful.

PM Key will win a third term, and the Nats will continue to control Parliament.  That much is clear.  The question rather should be whether they can win enough seats such that they can govern without coalition partners. 

I don't believe they will govern in their own right. The polling I've seen is quite odd - I had a look at Napier. Which is  NAT held seat on a margin of about 11%. I have no idea about the kind of seat... so who knows what it means.

However, the 2011 Result saw the Nats win 52% of the electorate votes and 48% of the party votes. But the polling I've seen has the LAB candidate winning 39% of the electorate vote (this is an open seat and the NAT candidate is at 33%) and the NAT party vote at 44% with Labor down 4% and the Greens up 3%

Frankly, it's going to be interesting. I expect swings against the NATS, swings to the Greens and probably a hold steady for Labour.

That "odd" poll from Napier is down to the entrance of a popular Conservative candidate who's pulling a significant portion of the electorate vote. Don't attempt to make nationwide predictions based on that.

Follow the results here:
http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/ (http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/)

National doing very well, Labour doing very badly (not that that was unexpected of course). It does seem though as if NZ First have overperformed a bit, whereas the Greens have done a little bit worse than was expected.

Current results seem to suggest a majority government for the Nationals.

It looks like the Nats will be the first party in New Zealand history (since the adoption of MMP) to be able to form a majority government on their own, assuming results hold.
----------------------------------

Update -with virtually all the votes in:

Nationals: 61 seats (48%)
Labour: 32 seats (25%)
Greens: 13 seats (10%)
New Zealand First: 11 seats (9%)
Maori: 2 seats -quota (1.3%)

61 seats is the bare minimum required for a political party to form a government on its own.  

Here's hoping that New Zealand breaks MMP.

And here's another:

http://data.nzherald.co.nz/

There is also ACT New Zealand and United Future with one seat each.

There is a 5% threshold, but it doesn't apply to parties winning an electorate (through doesn't really apply to ACT and United Future because .66% and .21% doesn't gave any proportionnal list seats anyways, even without a threshold).

MMP is going nowhere. Government tried to remove it in 2011, population voted to keep it (referendum held at the same time than 2011 elections).

Ew majority governments

In other news, forming an alliance with Kim Dotcom seems to have been a mistake for Mana.

Oh I didn't mean it like that (though that would be good), I just meant in the sense that majority governments are very rare under MMP systems, and yet here National have won a majority despite not winning a majority of the vote. I just find this result rather comical (especially the dreadful performance of Labour).

Labour have taken Te Tai Tokerau from Mana! Praise Jesus!

Looks like ACT is actually going to win a seat ???

While not perfect... John Key has been a competent PM and hasn't really given the NZ people a reason to vote them out.

The fact that Labour's campaign was terrible, was a bonus for the Nationals.

Odd that United Future can win an electorate on 0,2%, it must be an extremely small one, do they have very uneven electorates?

Clearly unfortunate that Conservatives can get 4,1% without representation and two parties get in with less than 1% (and less than 1/121 of the votes).

Aaaand we have a winner!

Is David Cunliffe still insisting he is going to lead Labour into the next election despite the thumping it took last night? 

A quick skim of Wikipedia indicates no major differences in population between electorates. United Future's leader, Peter Dunne is their only candidate who garners significant votes. Think of United Future as an Independent MP with a fringe party attached.

National Party        48.1  61 (majority of 1 seat!)
Labour                 24.7  32
Greens                 10.0  13
New Zealand First    8.9  11

Below threshold
----------------------------
Māori Party               1.3     2
ACT New Zealand    0.7    1
United Future        0.2    1
Conservative           4.1    0   
Internet MANA        1.3    0
----------------------------

Fringe parties
---------------------------
Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party   0.4    
Ban1080                                  0.2   
Democrats for Social Credit          0.1   
The Civilian Party   906                  0.0    
NZ Independent Coalition          0.0   
Focus New Zealand                  0.0    

1/121 = 0,83%, so United Future clearly got a very cheap seat for Peter Dunne. I gotta look at his electorate, but the votes for other candidates must have split a lot.

Absurd that the Conservatives don't get a seat given that UF & ACT have them (threshold should be 4% IMO) but I don't think you can call winning 50.83% of seats on 48.1% of the popular vote breaking MMP, as no electoral system can ever be exactly accurate given rounding errors produced even by very proportional representation formulas like D'hondt & the natural exponential win bonus of having a very large % lead over the opposition. New Zealanders definitely voted National & thr right & they've got a National government whose deserved majority will be effectively bolstered by the ACT member for Epsom & Peter Dunne's UF seat to be 63/120

Hilariously enough, Labour has a higher share of FPP seats than of list seats.

Disappointing, but meh.

It's that they don't even vote United Future in the party list ballot. They vote Dunne and Nat.

http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electorate-36.html

Not particularly surprising, as most people give their electorate vote to National or Labour even when voting for a minor party in the party vote.

Bad, but then the opposition had already screwed everything up; no worse than expected, then. Some silver linings as well; regaining Napier - a place with a long history of Labour representation - is something to be pleased at, even if it was via a vote-split fluke.

Despite the Conservatives missing out on seats (if I lived in NZ, I would have voted for them on the party list), I must say I'm overall pleased with the result.

Good on the ACT for surviving this round! It's always terrible to see a party with such potential having been taken over, for the past many years, by corruptocrats like John Banks, and it seems they're moving past that with fresh leadership. Overall, like Anton, I'm pretty happy with this result.

That would be 65 seats if you count the two Maori MPs who were just elected, and with whom PM John Key is also negotiating to form a government.  

Why bother negotiating with the Maori Party MPs as well? For the sake of broader inclusion?

Also, how strict/strong is party discipline in NZ? Would it be very difficult for the Nationals to maintain a government with their 61 seats exactly (or maybe +1 for the ACT MP)?

Besides further padding their majority, the Nationals think it worthwhile to include the Maori Party since it was part of the previous coalition which seemed to have worked out satisfactorily for both parties.  Also, settling Treaty of Waitangi claims (https://www.national.org.nz/policies/maori-affairs) is a part of the National Party platform.  And the Nationals seem to have a good track record on it.  

And I'll leave it to those more knowledgeable to answer your other questions....

Ah ok, if they work well together it seems like a good move. It'd be fun to see a breakdown of the Maori vote (those not registered to vote in the Maori districts), wonder if there was an exit poll of any kind.

So can someone kindly catch me up on what happened?

This article should give you the basics (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/20/us-newzealand-election-count-idUSKBN0HF06M20140920).  

The National Party has won a majority.  Here's the results map.

()

Interesting. Getting the majority is a pretty big deal.

We still have hundreds of thousands of 'special votes' that have yet to be counted (http://www.nzherald.co.nz/election-2014/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503581&objectid=11328942).

Just an FYI.

Labour leader David Cunliffe has just resigned (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10552279/David-Cunliffe-resigns-as-Labour-leader).

It only took him a week to decide. 

He should have gone the next morning, frankly.

Does NZ Lab have anything to hope for?

To be fair, a decade ago the Nationals had plumbed similar depths. NZ Labour probably just have to wait until Key retires to be competitive.

The Nationals were at 20.93% in 2002. Compared to that even 24.62% looks good.

Plus Key just won term #3. Voters should start getting tired of him soon even if he doesn't do anything wrong.

The election results have just been certified (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10580208/National-loses-majority-Greens-pick-up-one), and with the counting of the special votes, the Nats have just lost their majority, with the Greens picking up a seat.

Here (http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2014/) are the updated results:

Nationals: 60 seats (47%)
Labour: 32 seats (25%)
Greens: 14 seats (11%)
New Zealand First: 11 seats (9%)
Maori: 2 seats -quota (1.3%)

ACT and United Future each keep their MPs.  

Analysis of final results (http://www.scribd.com/doc/249022205/2014-Final-Election-Results)