New Zealand general election, 20th September 2014

[DC Al Fine]

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 proportional list seats anyways, even without a threshold).

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).

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.

[politicus]

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.

[freefair]

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

[Antonio the Sixth]

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

[Hash]

Disappointing, but meh.

[Andrea]

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.

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

[Nichlemn]

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

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.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

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.

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

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.

[Vosem]

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.

[Frodo]

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

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.  

[njwes]

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

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)?

[Frodo]

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

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?

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 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....

[njwes]

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

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?

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 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.

[Vega]

So can someone kindly catch me up on what happened?

[Frodo]

So can someone kindly catch me up on what happened?

This article should give you the basics.  

[andrew_c]

So can someone kindly catch me up on what happened?

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

[Vega]

Interesting. Getting the majority is a pretty big deal.

[Frodo]

We still have hundreds of thousands of 'special votes' that have yet to be counted.

Just an FYI.

[Frodo]

Labour leader David Cunliffe has just resigned.

It only took him a week to decide. 

[Filuwaúrdjan]

He should have gone the next morning, frankly.

[You kip if you want to...]

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.

[warandwar]

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.

[DC Al Fine]

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