By Bernard Hickey and Alex Tarrant
11:47 pm - Alex - Key says he’s going to head off for something a bit stronger than a cup of tea.
Key on TVOne says: “I want to work with the Maori Party.”
National has the numbers to put the asset sales programme through, so don’t need the Maori Party on that.
Key says hopeful he can put something together with the Greens as well.
Key says govt could return to surplus before 2014/15, but then notes last week’s failed German bond issue: “That’s virtually unheard of.” Says it's going to be a tumultuous three years.
11:34 pm - Alex - Key says for another 3 years there will be a National-led government in New Zealand.
Key says he spoke to Brash and Dunne. Working of formal agreements with those parties over the next few days.
Key says has spoken to Turia. Keen the Maori Party and the National Party are part of a government over the next three years as well.
11:30 pm - Alex - Key on way into Sky City now. Key says: “I’m delighted.”
“I’m not entirely surprised” on Peters getting back.
11:21 pm - Alex - Interesting comments from the Maori Party’s Pita Sharples.
Asked whether the Maori Party’s been punished this election, Sharples says yes: it’s partly due to the coalition with National, and also the Harawira episode.
Sharples says Maori Party going to have to consider “very carefully” what it does in the future is terms of relationships inside Parliament.
No tingle on the phone from the PM yet. Caucus meeting tomorrow morning.
11:16 pm - Alex - Rodney Hide says Labour owes it to Phil Goff, or else Labour would have had a worse result than tonight's 27%.
10:56 pm - Alex - Goff tells media he’s made a clear decision about what he wants to do (in regards to leadership), but will talk to caucus first.
10:50 pm - Alex - Goff says it’s been a long and hard battle. Sadness and regret on losing some very good caucus colleagues. Goff says Nash and Davis will be back in Parliament in the future.
“The people have made their decision and we treat their decision with humility and respect.”
“It might not have been our time this time but our time will come again.”
Goff says Labour a bit bloodied but not defeated.
Goff says he wished Key well for the next three years. Labour will support good decisions made by a National-led govt, but attacks decisions with no mandate such as asset sales.
No mention of party leadership at all from Goff.
10:40 pm - Alex - Brash says he will tender his resignation tomorrow to the ACT board.
Brash says he’s had a call from Key, who wants to work with the ACT Party (ie. work with Banks).
10.33 pm - Bernard - The more you look at it the uglier this looks for Labour. Not only has their party vote slumped, but they've lost many of the fresh MPs who came in in 2008, including Kelvin Davis and Stuart Nash. Carol Beaumont also missed out. She had done a good job campaigning against loan sharks.
10:29 pm - Alex - Cunliffe in New Lynn: Says some of Labour's vote has bled to the Greens and some of it’s gone to NZ First.
“It’s just not the time to be speculating,” he says when saked about the leadership
The way it’s shaping up for Labour, young guns Davis, Sepuloni and Nash will miss out. Nash was one of the big drivers behind Labour's tax package, and Davis is touted as the future of the Maori wing of the party.
10.21 - Bernard - Sad to see Stuart Nash missing out in Napier for Labour and not high enough on the list to get back in. He was a good MP with plenty of energy. Maybe Labour should have been a bit more ruthless on its list.
10:19 pm - Alex - FYI ACT needs 1.2% for Brash to get back in. They have 1.08% with 95.8% of the vote counted.
10:16 pm - Alex - Garner says the Maori Party could sit down with Key next week and stop asset sales – as they could hold the balance of power.
However, looks like Nats could go with ACT and UF, and not need Maori Party. But what if they want to get something through one of those two don’t agree with? They’re probably going to need the Maori Party at some stage.
10:09 pm - Alex - Banks says it’s been a hard six months. Thanks ACT on campus – who he’s very indebted to.
Rodney Hide on TV3 says that, as it looks like Brash isn't getting back in, effectively you can't have one MP in Parliament and he's not the leader #leadershipchange?
Hide says Banks effectively going to be just another National MP in Parliament.
10:08 pm - Alex - Norman talking to Green Party supporters
“For the first time in our history we have achieved over 10% of the Party vote.”
Norman says Greens went into this campaign with target of 10% of the party vote.
10 pm - Bernard - Greens co-leaders Russel Norman and Metiria Turei have arrived at Greens' HQ on K-Rd. They're likely to get 13 MPs and nearly 11% of the vote. They're about to partay.
9:59 pm - Alex - Dunne accepting Ohariu on TVOne
Key looking like he’ll need Dunne and Maori Party
Does Key need ACT? “That’s his call,” Dunne says.
“He’s shown himself to date to be a pretty inclusive leader."
Dunne says he’s always been very confident of winning his seat back. Dunne says return of Peters a huge surprise – born out of the cup of tea.
9:54 pm - Alex - Garner on TV3 calls it for Banks in Epsom, says Parker's votes are the difference
9:54 pm - Alex - Turia says Maori Party aren’t prepared to pledge anything at this point (looks like they have 3 MPs). Going to talk to their people in Auckland tomorrow, and perhaps they may decide to go back into Opposition.
She says Peters and Harawira gained votes at the Maori Party’s expense.
“We’re not the left or the right.”
9.40 pm - Bernard - Winston Peters is thrilled. He's arrived at NZ First HQ and is talking on live national television.
He thinks MMP is great. He's obviously back...but not that far back. National looks like it has enough seats to govern with United Future's 1 seat and ACT's 1 seat. Maori has 3 seats National could use as well.
9.30 pm - Bernard - One News is forecasting National getting 59 seats in the 120 seat Parliament, but with 1 ACT MP and 1 United Future MP then National would scrape in. NZ First would be back in with 9 MPs... Full fresh results here at Elections.org.nz
9.15 pm - National looks like it will win, either on its own or in coalition with ACT's 1 seat and Maori's 3 seats. The slight surprise is NZ First are back in.
9.10 pm - Bernard - With more than a third of the votes counted, National may win alone, but it's tight with NZ First back in. The combined NZ First, Labour, Greens vote equals 54 seats to National/ACT/Maori's 66 seats.
I wonder if NZ First's anti-foreign ownership and anti-asset sales stance was more popular than many thought.
9.00 pm - Bernard - Hone Harawira looks like he's going to win his electorate. He's talking tough about not dealing with National.
Results so far here:
8.45 pm - Bernard - With 25% of the vote counted, Kiwiblog's David Farrar is saying NZ First and Winston Peters looks like it's going to get back into parliament with 6.8% of the vote. He's thrilled. He says it would be great for bloggers. But we're not sure yet whether it means National will be able to govern alone. So far it looks like ACT's John Banks will get in.
Here's the running total with 25% of the vote counted. NZ First looks like it's back with 6.8% of vote; National has 50%; Labour 25%; Greens 10% .
8.25pm - Bernard - The running total so far on One News shows NZ First has 6.8% of vote with 9.7% of vote counted. National is on 50%, Labour on 26% and Greens on 10%.
National's victory is far from assured, although it would have 62 seats on the count so far.
7.20 pm - Alex - The polling booths have just closed and the votes are being counted. Will National get the majority the polls have been forecasting, or will Labour manage to cobble together a grand coalition of the left?
And what will happen with possible king-maker Winston Peters?
We welcome your thoughts on the night's results as they come in. TVOne and TV3 have rolling coverage from now. What do you think about what their analysts are saying?
And of course who is going to win?
(Updated with count so far with 99% of polling booths counted)
206 Comments
wow - how vacuous was Key's victory speech?
Sort of acceptance speech you might expect from the award-winning lead actor in a Wellywood movie about a housing commision lad turned millionaire forex trader living the high-life and suddenly finding out that he's been made prime-minister of some country.
I mean - what has this bloke been doing for the last 3 years - apart from hawking his mug around chat shows and women's magazines?
Where's the future plan for NZ? Is there one that doesn't involve maxing out the sovereign credit card and hiving off the empty bottles.
Oh yeah- there was a brief comment about reducing debt and increasing incomes. Greeted by stony silence.
Disappointed I am , Bernard , that you didn't trust Wolly , DB , the Duke and others ( ahem ! ) not to blog politically , today ........
....... but here we are : 3 things stand out , at just 12 % of the vote counted :
1 : Banksie does look likely to win Epsom , and to keep ACT on life-support , a whiles longer .
2 : NZ First is polling over 6 % of the party vote . The tea-cups debacle was a winner for Winnie ....... and not all of the supporter base has carked it , yet .....
and 3 : Labour are struggling ! You didn't take Gummy's advice and re-juvenate the party after the 2008 arse-kicking , and now you're paying for it !
2 : NZ First is polling over 6 % of the party vote . The tea-cups debacle was a winner for Winnie ....... and not all of the supporter base has carked it , yet .....
There you go again with that crap about NZ First's base "dying off". It is true that most of Peters' supporters are older people like yourself. How many countries have such a high percentage of old people as NZ? How many have an oldie population increasing in size as much as NZ? Not bloody many. The pool of potential Winnie supporters grows ever larger, not the reverse. That may or may not be a good thing, but it's a desperate lie to claim that his support base is in danger.
Geez dude , don't burst a valve ! ....... whatever happened to your wonderful sense of humour , that we enjoy so much ?
.... I voted NZF ! ( it was a $2 coin toss, between them & Greens ..... tails ! ... Winnie got the Gummy tick . )
And for what it's worth , Peters is likely to be a more ferocious opponent of the National Government , than Labour . Labour's problems have only just begun . Being upstaged by Winnie in parliament over the next 3 years is a certainty .
... smile , Marlarkey , life isn't meant to be so serious !
Gummy, I think there is a lot more to Winston's unfortunate resurgence in the polls than just cuppagate. I have a feeling that there has been a sizable protest vote against Labour by traditional Labour party supporters, and NZF has been the beneficiary of that. And I think what is behind that is a rejection by older Labour Party supporters of its commitment to raise the age of National Super to 67. I believe, and I always have, that that policy will have a disproportionate negative effect on folks who are more likely to be traditional Labour party supporters. White collar workers, tradesmen, beneficiaries, low-paid workers, etc., these are the ones who are less likely to have the physical resources or the financial imperative to keep working until 67. Retirement at 65 is a godsend to them.To take that away matters more to them than it does to professional workers who are often quite happy to work until 70 and beyond and who can easily afford to wait until 67.
This policy may well have cost Labour some of its own traditional support base and NZF, given its close links to the elderly voter, is the natural destination for them.
In 2005 National got 1,053,398 votes, 35.2% of enrolled voters, 44.9 % of those who voted.
In 2011 (election night figures) National got 957,769 votes, 31.4% of enrolled voters, 48 % of those who voted.
The total votes and % of enrolled voters are likely to go up a bit after special votes are counted. There are 220,720 special votes.
NZ First got 95,356 votes in 2005 and 135,865 on election night 2011; special votes to be added.
If you look at the trend graphs the Green's rose from about July/August, and Labour dropped....so its fairly reasonable to assume that most of the extra Green vote came from Labour....NZF on the other hand rose in the few weeks before the election so its reasonable to assume that most NZF votes came from National...ACt also lost 60% of its vote, most I would assume went to the Conservatives and National...
The conservatives will be interesting to figure out, they are not conservatives in the UK / Margert Thatcher mold. more like Republicans to my mind.....but 2.6%? from no where in a few months is good going. If they drop the excessively high 5% in MMP to 2%, thats 3 MPs....
regards
DB - What makes Winstons resurgence unfortunate in your opinion?
Your devotion as a JK fanboy is going to make you look foolish very soon, as if it has not already. The same goes for those who have been sucked in by the smiley face!
Your previous comment above this one speaks volumes about you. - "Can I crow now" - Stop treating it like a sport you clown, it's too serious for stupid people who make stupid comments!
Oh, and not all NZF's votes came from older people...they came from those with half a brain, who look at a broken system, and see that the only person who might make life uncomfortable for either of the major parties is Winston. People are waking up to the BS that is the left right paradigm scam, you are not one of them though eh DB, !
DB - What makes Winston’s resurgence unfortunate in your opinion?
Because I don't want another career politician elected to Parliament whose being there on and off since 1978. The country needs to move forward, not backwards. Is that so hard to understand?
Of course what I find hilarious from reading many of the comments in here this morning is the extent to which so many of you have pursed lips and a po face! What's even more hysterical is to read how National, after wining 48% of the party vote, has been characterised as suffering a massive electoral defeat and rejection. Just look at how desperate and out of touch with your communities some of you actually are.
We could never accuse some of you from being sore losers now, could we?
David I said it in an earlier post - It's not a game of sport we are talking about, and I do not do party politics. Its crack for simple minded fools who like to be controlled.
Your argument makes no sense, because based on that we would not have - John Banks, Bill English or any other the other old failed politicians who have been around the block, who you blindly support, hardly moving forward are we !
Party politics is BS, we need functional servants coming from all walks of life who understand the real world and are not blinded or brainwashed by simplistic noise and spin.
Doing what is best for your country, not your corporate money masters who control both sides of any campaign, yet have simple people believing and esposuing how they are winners, and others are losers
What part of that do you not understand?
Let's face it people. Labour were unelectable.
Once again 21 seats are held by two parties WITHOUT a constituent MP in sight. This system stinks. That is 17% of the seats have gone to two parties who are totally unaccountable. Before the election, the Greens were saying that they wouldn't deal with National - now they might.
NZ First? totally wasted vote - mainly from disgruntled labour supporters.
65% turn out just shows the apathy the electorate were feeling as most of them must feel comfortable enough to not even be bothered to vote. ACT get in in Epsom with a fit-in and the Maori Party only win seats in electorates that are set up for them.
Do you really think this is democracy at its greatest??
Welcome to the darkside MattinAuck. Depressing ain't it? Better to imagine that politicians are upright men and women with integrity, who'll represent their electorate who are fully informed and cognizant of the important issues, in full good faith, prepared to serve the public interest. Back in the real world, politicians are venal, grandstanding, clowns with zero integrity when it counts, easily swayed by powerful special interest groups, prepared to bend to the winds rather than act with any integrity and the electorate are ignorant, selfish, abysmally misinformed thanks to a failed Fourth Estate who are constrained to limit the conveyance of the issues to 30 second soundbites in order to retain the attention of the querelous public, weaned on daily helpings of infotainment and to allow the News to be framed by the real purpose of Television, Advertisements. Ignorance is truly bliss
can't stop laughing.
Neither can Key and English, the two beneficiaries of the fallout from Brash's leaked email. Not that I'm suggesting either of them leaked Brash's email so that he'd be canned and Key would get the top job while English got revenge for being arsed out by Brash. Nope. Not saying that at all.
The irony of a parasitic Central banker, sucking the life out of the host, the host dies, and the parasite moves on. If he cannot find another host soon, he too will die. Not even close to being a leader or someone who deserves a vote. A true leader has honor, integrity, character. Sticks to his principals, and believes in what he is doing, a parasite on the other hand....
Good point skudiv...open season on bankers everywhere I think, especially the central bankers...unelected bankers puppets...
Watch now as the aussie banks extract billions more from this indebted hole...and what did they invest ...nothing but magic credit...fabulous scam...fully supported by stupid pollies in power.
It would seem as though a great depression..a collapse of systems and an era of mayhem and killing is needed before the fatheads realise how dumb they were.
The 'public social print it when you want credit'.... dream is not the solution to this idiocy that festers like Gangrene throughout the world economies.....it just needs politicians determined to lock the banks into regulations with very long prison sentences for bosses who take that step into greed.
Will we see this happen in NZ....not a chance in hell....roll on the next property bubble of madness and greater credit splurge into a future disaster...who gives a stuff !
Well I hope they review MMP and get that silly 5% threshold reduced to 2%.......its a good result for the Conservatives really IMHO....just look at ACT by comparison......
An excellent result for the Green's of course 13 or 14MPs...
:D
A good result for NZF as well....Im glad they are back...detest WP but thats democracy....
regards
An excellent result for the Greens, Steven, on such a low voter turnout, I'm not so sure about that? And as I correctly predicted there was a collapse in the Green party vote on the day from 14% back to ~11%. That's down about 22%!! And remember this Steven, and all you other watermelons, 90% of the New Zealanders who voted today have flatly rejected your political and social views. That’s 90%! In anybody's language that is an overwhelming rebuttal. So in view of that, it would be good if you do try and remember your place, and do not assume that you either speak for or posses a superior political and or social aspiration for New Zealand, or better knowledge. Ninety percent of the people of this country evidently beg to differ with you, and you should take it on board that that may in fact be telling you something!
David,
If 90% of the country would tell you to jump off a cliff, wouldn't you agree that you should do it due to overwhelming demand? Never mind if you don't like the outcome...
Would you like some more lemons with that?
My word, this result has really got the looney left crawling out of the wood work this morning all huffing and puffing.
hahaha, o yeh the majority is right. Waht a great argument, can't get enough. I'm cracking up this morning. Just thinking of the great scientists of history that were persecuted by the 90% who rejected their view. The world is round? Hell no. The earth revolves around the sun? Hell no! Whats next I wonder?
David if it makes you feel better to be one of the brainwashed morons who like the "safety of collective thinking" of the world, good on you bro...
Lowest turn out in decades, it hardly speak of confidence or interest in our politics does it?
You are going to get farked, just like the rest of us by your "blue crew" respresenting the private banking backed corporations, the same any anyone else..
The likes of you just want to believe that because who you voted for might be in control that therefore you are winners, who are protected from the damage...LOL nah mate, you won't be!
So you voted based on what you preceive to be the lesser of the evils, AWESOME way to vote isn't it!
Did you research the party links, or the leaders backgrounds in banking and their connections to the destruction of foreign countries?
Do you understand that once NZ has no more assets letf to sell, and we go broke that any natural resources will be taken basically at gun point..
Would you be prepared to get off your bum and partake actively in democracy if you bothered to understand the simple questions above?
I would be surprised, because most people want to vote, then hope their team wins, then hand over resposibility to their team, then hoe things get better, then moan when they dont, then vote again next time, and repeat...
Can you even state why National will do less damage, as a start?
In the thirty odd years that I have been able to vote, there has never been a time that I could say that there was a party with policies that I would agree with 100%. I am honest enough to admit I vote for the party that pisses me of less than the others. You talk about natural resources , if we were allowed to exploit them instead of worrying about the snails we would not have to sell our assets. Unless you are prepared to dismantle the Welfare State you need the money to pay for it. Borrowing it indefinitely is not an option, so it's either sell or cut. Or there is always increased taxation.
Ever wondered why the "snails" as you refer them, had legislation put in place to protect them?
I am for environmental sustainablility, and protection, there must be a balance, NZ must not go bankrupt again, because we will lose what little control we perceive to have over our natural resources currently!
We allow our waters to be fished and poisoned to death with profits going offshore, this is madness!
We are allowing foreign companies to dredge/mine/extract offshore, with any profits heading the same way - This is madess, although I accept we need some assistance with the technology at etc!
We allow on-shore mining to happen, with profits heading offshore - This is madness!
Many more options than Sell or Cut even if given just a few seconds thoughts - 2 dimensional thinking is what life has been whittled down to...There are always options, even if we are lied to that there is not!
O.k. Let's leave the snails in place. I have notthing against conservation either.
What are these other options you are talking about? I am really interested to hear what your solution to our problems. If they are good next election I may become your campaign manager, convince me.
The green's aimed for 10%.....and 12 MPs, 13 and maybe 14 with the special vote is possible....Polls are always out a bit....90% didnt reject the Green's how typical extremist of you....they simply voted for the ones they preferred more......
or by your own standards, what did Brash aim for? 10% and 12 MPs, he got 1.1% and 1 MP....ppl moved on.....his vote dropped....so 60% odd of his vote fled....
regards
And I remember times when people were claiming National was becoming irrelevant. It happens to all parties. They have their highs and they have their lows. When Labour'a at its peak, National is a shell. Now it's the other way 'round. In a few years National will once again be written off as "irrelevant" while Labour forges ahead. And on it goes.
It looks like three more years of economic incompetence. Unemployment will increase. Thrre will be more people on benefits. Our young will have to leave the country to get jobs, There will be more child abuse and child poverty. Our exporters, other than Fonterra, will not be be able to continue in business. John boy's faith in neo liberalism will continue as he borrows offshore so that we can buy our baubles. Dear god. Somebody said "most people would rather die than think and most people do".......
A lot of the mess we are in is down to 9 years of Labour allowing us to speculate like crazy on property....in the next few months Im pretty sure we will see the fallout of that 9 years of mis-management of Labour.....as we go into the Greatest Depression in living memory. Sure un-employment will be bad, thats going to happen in no small part because of Labour....
National isnt buying baubles....the voter is buying them with money financed from abroad.....at least National has tried to curb our passion for making money without actually making a good.
regards
Thats not really objective Steven, if National were in power for that whole time they would not have done things any different. Basically the RBNZ should have aggresively raised the base interest rates to deal with this, but they are relatively politically independent anyway. They didn't make the call and would not have done any different if National had been in government. In fact if they had done this they might have risked bursting the bubble, which would not have made the bank popoular either.
If Ben Bernanke didn't see the financial crisis coming, you can hardly expect the Labour government to see it coming (and yes it was imported). Parts of the NZ economy were in a bubble and not very balanced, before 2007/2008, but this would have gone on for a long time further, probably another term, before the NZ economy collapsed itself. The bursting was brought forward by the global crisis and actually the government accounts were among the ones in the best shape when the recession set in. I guess it should be pointed out that most of the government borrowing since then would have occured regardless of who was in government and is not due to any policy difference between National and Labour.
What I don't understand is people who have read Steve Keen and still conclude that
1) The government effectively sets the direction of the financial system.
2) The way the financial system works isn't to blame for the financial crisis.
Yah agree. Having the Libs in power in Aus during the time that Labour was in government here didn't seem to have any effect on the crazy house price boom in Australia. So I don't see that anything different would have been done here in NZ if National had been in power. (The reality is that they both listen to the neo-libs in Treasury...)
What gets me was the ads during the campaign that stated "Less debt under National". Would have loved to have seen a graph of debt over the past 20 years alongside those ads.
Essentially public debt was flat, until National came in in 2008... But then they had to step up to the debt plate as the public had been like Mr Creosote in Monty Python and had decided to take a rest from over borrowing....
In summary, what I am looking forward to happening is:
a) taking on more public debt. Especially by the City Councils thanks to Rodney Hide
b) The sell off of assets (such as Auckland Water) to pay for said debts.
c) Monopoly rents to be extracted for water and electricity
Nic, yes actually I suspect National would have been as bad....maybe worse.....so you are correct I should have said both, but then Patrica wasnt objective either.....
Trouble with agressively raising interest rate sis it hurts those not speculating and business...its a bad iption IMHO.
Govn accounts, borrowing, oh yes I mostly agree...however I suspect Labour in 2008~2009 if they had won would have stimulated, National sat still (mostly) that kept our debt sane....I think that was mostly the correct response....I can accept though that it might have been luck and not good judgement, I suspect thats the case.
The RB really needed more tools from Govn....for instance when I re-mortgaged 10 years ago the max LVR I could get was 80% (my LVR was way better) if the then Labour Govn had given a LVR tool to the RB aka Texas at 80% and allowed to vary it that would have stopped most of the crazy speculation....of course they would not because that costs votes, that is clearly Labour fault.
What we see now today is 90 to 95% lending...s now it would be very hard to get back to 80%.....and we are out of time....we are going into a depression IMHO....and that will see huge property losses, 50% IMHO...ppl and especially younger who have LVRs above 80% are going to be severly burned and even bankrupted......these will probably say screw NZ im off.......these will be a selection of our best younger generation in x and y.....
1) The govn could
2) Of course it is
Its not a case of not understanding IMHO, I think they would if they looked. Iits mostly because most ppl dont look past the morning local paper.....to see who is bonking who.....or maybe they are too afraid to....
In any event we will I think get what we deserve...which will be 20 years of a good ass kicking....experience is the best teacher IMHO.....and we are about to learn some very hard lessons.
Govns didnt see it coming....more importantly economists didnt....or 99% of them Steve keen is one of a handful who clearly did. However if you have studied Peak Oil and understand that our global economy HAS to grow and grow at about 4% per year (to pay off debt) which uses 2.5% more energy BUT there is no more energy then you know we have been heading for a fall.....
Govns didnt want to look, and they still dont.....someone said that it will take about three mega recessions (this is the second) before Govns and the voter will get the msg.....or rather accept the msg....they have had the msg for some years (Hirsch report 2005 for one) but ignored it.......
regards
For God's Sake Steven get over the property thing. Compared to other countries we are in a good state. If we mined our resources, like the Aussies do, we would be flourishing. Property rises have nothing to do with the 'state we are in'. Labour encouraged them no more than any other previous government here or anywhere else.
The majority prefer property price rises - well those who own. The only ones who moan are those that daren't commit. I would hate to think I bought my house spent 50K on doing it up and it was worth the same or less than what I paid for it.
I always find it ironic that those who laud MMP for its proportionality (inevitably the self-serving looney left because it enables their tiny 6% of the vote to wag the parliamentary dog) are nevertheless the first to dismiss the 43% of the votes cast against MMP as irrelevant, unimportant, not mattering, can be ignored. Where is their desire to recognise that all votes count now? Where is their championing of electoral proportionality as a fair system that allows all sides a voice and an equal chance to influence things? Apparently proportionality only counts when it suits their interests for it to do so.
And when it doesn’t....................
Why don't you go ahead and invent a voting system where people can proportionally split their vote by voting system, and then use each part to vote using each voting system. Then we can have it added to the next inevitable referendum, when another political party wants to try their luck selling FPP back to a country which has decided twice now it doesn't want it.
Didn't you just say 57% of the vote for MMP was from 6% of the looney-left. Maybe you should ask for a recount. You appear to have uncovered some kind of conspiracy, or are just spouting off.
I also see the irony in the fact that you don't like the results of an FPP type poll held on proportinal representation.
And where have I expressed that view? I have only passed a comment on the Left's response to the don’t like MMP vote. Perhaps if you took your red tinted glasses off you would read more clearly.
Not dismiss totally, I can accept that 43% of the ppl are not interested in good democracy....just the ability for their party to get absolute dictatorship for 3 years...
and actually from the discusions Ive had in the past with union reps they were clearly against MMP....these are hard core left I suppose, just as bad as hard core right, which is you.
Personally I welcome NZF back to parliment, I see the vote for them a clear indication that aset sales were not wanted IMHO. I am sad that we have a 5% threshold, then it looks like teh conservatives would have had 2 or 3 mps as well...
Meanwhile the Don Brash 10% promise has seen their % drop to 1.1%, a clear indication of no one wanteing hard right policies and that twit in the house.
Of course FPP right now advantages the right...so there you are banging your drum....oh why am I not surprised...
JK has a marginal mandate....
Yes....a low turnout apparantly favours the right....10% more voters could have seen the left win.....so those 35% should hang their heads in shame.....they handed a marginal win to the right...
Also looking a Dunne's electorate I see that 1400 ppl voted green...they must be stupid......those 1400 votes for CC would have seen Dunne gone.....and that would have probably resulted in a Green / Labour Govn......like duh.
regards
WRONG - low turnout favours the opposition - whoever they may be. If a party is in power and the electorate are happy with them, they are less likely to turn out and vote - voter apathy it is called.
Low turnout favouring National is another Labour piece of propanganda. I think the only party who lost out through low turnout were the Nats. if we had had an 80%+ turnout they would have had an absolute majority.
This time I think that's definitely not right. The people who could not be arsed getting up and voting were not National party types. If that 1m had of voted I reckon we would have seen a different result to what we got.
The media said over and over that the polls favoured National and they couldn'y lose so I believe that put off a lot of the people who would have voted for Labour or the Green party. Any way it was a good excuse for lazy bastards to use for not doing their civic duty.
Not unexpected for FPP to be second most popular.
If STV had been explained as giving you to rank the politicians so that you could put the ones you disliked the most last, then I'm sure STV would have garnered more support.
There would be a certain pleasure being able to put people like John Banks or Sue Bradford last. Under STV, I think you would find John Banks to be almost unelectable without a straight majority.
And under STV, Sue Bradford would almost certainly be always last on the list.
Fonterra uses STV and it would be a dog of a voting system in a general election. For it to work properly you really need to know and understand all the candidates in order to rank them. Sure you don't have to rank anyone other than the person you are voting for, but if you really don't want someone to get in you need to rank them last which means that you have to rank all the others first. I could see a lot of informal votes in a STV system.
Don't fret Iain
48% is not a mandate for Mr Key and his merry men to wreak havoc, and surely a recipe to guarantee the Nats will be toppled in 2014.
I think many Nats will be aware that John Banks is unfairly taking a National causus seat that one of them rightly derserved. It was Nationals for the taking and the teagate strategy backed fired badly with Act getting just one seat.
Caution will prevail amongst those Tories looking beyond immediate gratification and may slow things down more than one might believe tonight.
Party votes for Epsom:
National: 20,505
Labour: 4,777
Greens: 3,515
NZ First: 819
ACT: 804
Conservative: 362
But if they did that, Gummy, then the Left wouldn't be able to moan and bitch about the Right 'manipulating' the system eh? Oh no silly me, they'd moan and bitch about it anyway. Because when the Left do it, it's entirely fair and justified. In fact it's almost saintly.
They garnered more votes than Tribeless's Libertarianz Party , 1405 ........ yee-ouch !
....... care to comment Mark , why are the Libertarianz gaining zero traction from one election to the next ?
Newbie Colin Craig got 50 thousand votes for the Conservatives , first attempt ... more than ACT and NZ Maori party votes combined !!!
It was close, it was close. The tails of the dog beast are flapping still.
Good result all in all. Stability is what's required right now ... NZ has spoken ... blogg commentators have realised ... and whinged as usual ... (not Bernhard - YOU!!)
... the country will be better off when the compulsive disorderly minority who restrict their votes to the crazy liberterian or the crazy left realise (same positioin in the circle of politics). God help us if they unite.
I disagree, we have too many laws, and too many problems caused by past solutions, to past problems caused by past solutions. Show me some problems that have not arisen from past solutions, and I may consider stability to be a good thing. The greatest casue of problems is solutions. If government had done nothing for the last 100 years would we be any worse off? I think not.
TV3 kicked TV1 into touch on the election presentation . Good work John C. & the crew , their man Paddy down at National HQ was a hoot !
ipredict easily out-gunned the other pollsters in the prediction stakes . Landlines are the past , those surveys are getting out of whack to the electorate as a whole .
900 000 did not vote , out of 3 million on the roll ! ... Ouch !!! ... the lowest % voter turn out since 1888 ..... a message to all of our politicians in that ?
Conservatives garned one party vote in every 40 , first time up to bat ..... excellent . JK will be wise to assist Colin's team , in the 2014 election . National have fewer right of centre allies , since Don Brash cannibalised them in 2005 .
It's funny when you think about it. The people least likely to support Greed Is Good parties such as National or ACT, and who would suffer least under parties like the Greens or Labour, were the ones who didn't front up at the polling booths, thereby forfeiting the election - and their future - to the Nats.
Don't expect to see the smiling round the Cabinet table stay in place for very long....wild Bill will spill the swill........the next three years will make or break the 014 decision...either this govt grabs the economy by the scruff of the debts and rips into the wasteful state splurging madness...or it will be Goodnight National and Hello to a Labour plonker in just 3 years!!!!
Europe is at the very best going into a very very long recession..along with the UK and the usa...where Japan has been for yonks....Beijing bunglers are printing to hasten the collapse of the economy, but buy the sods in power time to stash some gold and grab a bolthole or two.
QED do not expect the NZ economy to better a 'standstill future'. But Key and Co have promised 170,000 new jobs!...with an impending return of many thousands from across the ditch because the Aussie economy is dependent on China and on a property bubble in decline....
Fools need to face the facts....There can be no CREDIT based fake period of growth as in Clark's failed time....the chch insurance loot is it.....that is the only real capital injection not dependent on credit....What does that tell you?.....The govt needs to measure the chch rebuild with the hands of an eye surgeon...they must measure out the activity to absorb what local labour they can without stuffing the rest of the economy into a period of brainless building inflation costs....
There is scope right now for a few months only..for the govt to front up with an immigration move to encourage the capital into NZ to spark building activity in all regions and not just chch.....the chch thing can then be done at a measured pace...without the stupidity....The capital will not be credit...it will amount to real investment and will lead to real employment over the long time..
But there needs to be a crushing blow to the property spec behaviour...the banks must be sorted out...ie an end to the credit pushing madness...There needs to be an end to the state sector feeding frenzy and the bloated salaries in the Sir Humphrey clubhouse in wgtn...
3 years....no more Mr Key....opt for fiddle and tweak and you will be gone...
JK's mansion is now worth $ 10 million ! ...... and he only paid $ 8 million for that shack ...
..... good thing that he took Ollie Newland's advice , and ignored Bernard Hickey's prognostications ......
$ 2 million easy money , and no capital gains tax .... whew ! ...... Thank God we beat Labour ...
In fine from Wolly, great to see you so optimistic. How about throwing in a devastating drought that cripples the great NZ agriculture while you're at it? Maybe an earthquake and tsunami, some Foot and Mouth and a 25c exchange rate to throw petrol up to 4bucks a litre whats the worst that could happen aye.
More t the point GBH the apathetic bastards that couldn't get off their ass for five minutes to vote...Greenlighted the Key agenda...wankers to a man....or (other) as the case may be.
The undeniable enemy is apathy spawned from weak minded individuals that make up a good percentage of our so called democracy defering to ..."oh I don't know you decide for me and I'll throw bricks at you later"
The irony of a Democracy is that you have the right not to exercise your rights , then be the first to complain when your own apathy leaves you marginalised.
Is it lack of education..? is is laziness...is it both.
Stupid lazy bastards.
P.S. GBH... http://www.bundesbank.de/presse/presse_kontakt.en.php
I am disappointed , Count , at the low count , Count ....... 100's of thousands who are enrolled , but did not vote . Big butt , with remote ...... looking at the Sky , methinks !
.... where is Walter ? ...... I'd like his opinion , I miss the Swiss Miss ...... to compare our democratic process with Switzerland .
Would they have had a referendum on selling the SOE's , if you please , miss Swiss cheese ?
I hope you are rational enough to change your mind especially if we find out once again that there is no confidence fairy.
National plus Act in 2008: 48.6%
National plus Act in 2011: 49.06%
Hardly a big swing to the centre-right. Unfortunately National just cannibalised Act. Very sad for Don Brash, we needed him there to get some economic sense from the centre-left leaning National Party!
More muddle through and no direction for the next 3 years.
And of course:
National - Act 2008: 63 out of 122 seats
National - Act 2011: 61 out of 121 seats.
A great victory and swing to the centre-right? Not really.
Maoris and Greens needed on side to get the Nats across 2014, especially when it becomes clear the ChCh rebuild is not going to happen in any great rush.
And where did the ChCh voters go? Even with lower turnout ChCh Central down about 7 or 8,000 votes - will that be a lot of specials to count from round the country? We'll wait and see, but I think the swing to National was from those largely unaffected by the earthquakes thinking the Nats have done a good job - which they seriously haven't. Time will prove this.
Note also,
NZ First needs the smallest boost to pick up a 9th member.
National needs the smallest drop to lose their 60th member.
Act haven't got a chance of picking up a second member unless their special vote is triple the general vote.
Greens could pick up another member if they have a swing to them in the specials (they usually do).
Could it be National plus Act with just 60 out of 121 seats?
Across the Christchurch electorates National did very well , and Labour disappointed . One can only conclude that the voters are well pleased with the support from the government post-'quake . And that this is also an endorsement of Gerry Brownlee's stirling efforts in the 'quake recovery .
"The Labour Party was established on 7 July 1916 in Wellington"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_Labour_Party
The Party is not likely to be holding a party on 7 July 2016....given the prospects for leadership post Goff.
Phil Goff tried hard , but the henchmen really didn't back him , did they ... Cunny & co. were more interested in which part of his back to slip the knife into , post election , than in actually defeating National .
.... and due to a poorly constructed party list , Labour has lost some of it's bright young talent .
To be fresh and vibrant in the 2014 election , Labour will need to have ousted all the babyboomers in their ranks ...... out with Cunliffe , Parker , Jones , Little ...... out with the lot of them . ...... " Rejuvenation " should be Labour's catch-cry .
You forgot two of the other desiccated old Labour dinosaurs who got re-elected, Gummy. Trevor Mallard and Ruth Dyson. With progressive, ‘fresh talent’ like that, who needs enemies! These old fossils from the Clark-Cullen Labour Government have clung to their safe Labour seats, and that has cost Labour any chance of rejuvenation and renewal during the last three years, or the next. It has cost the party big time. Well Labour learn the lesson and dump them? You knows? But whoever drew up Labour’s Party list should be shot tomorrow at dawn.
Yup , Clayton Cosgrove out of his Waimakariri seat , but back in on the list ...
.. at least Damien O'Conner on the West Coast had the guts to go for glory.... no back-sliding in on the party vote ( and he said some choice things about the " Rainbow Brigade " within NZ Labour ....... good man , that ! )
Labour's issue seems to be that they think we - the voters - are wrong , and that we need to come to our senses , to see that NZ Labour has all the correct answers ...... the same delusion haunts them in 2011 , as it did back in 2008 ......
I enjoy a sound set of values which guides and informs my views, Lloyd. These allow me to judge various proposals for fit against those values. I'm sad for you that you clearly don't, but are subject to every passing whim and fancy of fashion that comes your way. Or maybe it would be more accurate to say every election bribe that comes your way. It must be very confusing to have lived so long, and yet not have developed a set of values. I imagine this would leave you prone to obsessions.
Well spotted ChrisJ.
With 220,720 special votes to come I suspect some politicians may be more anxious than they are letting on. National currently gets 60 seats with 47.986% of the party vote. By my reckoning that share of the vote only has to drop by 0.11% and National loses one seat to have 59 out of 120.
If NZ First increases their share of the vote by just 0.04% (less than 800 votes) then they will get another list seat. The Greens would need to lift their percentage of the vote 0.25% (to 10.865%) to get another seat.
Who knows what if anything this election's special votes might change, but with the results currently finely balanced a few thousand votes one way or the other could make a big difference. A possibility (remote) is for National with 59 seats out of 122.
The Elections NZ site gives the total number of votes cast yesterday plus the number of special votes still to be counted. That totals 2,254581. Total number on the voter roll is 3,053,705. Turnout is 73.5%.
The lowest turnout since 1887 (I remeber it like it was yesterday), although the way turnout was calculated then was different.
I suspect the 65% is based on number of people eligible to vote, not the number of people enrolled. The number of people enrolled is the basis for the other %s given by Hugh for 2002, 2005 and 2008.
Well Labour's vote goes from 796,880 in 2008 to 541,499 (plus whatever is their share of the 220720 special votes) in 20111.
NZ First up -- 95,356 in 2008, 135,865 (plus any special vlotes) in 2011.
ACT went the other way -- 85,496 in 2008, this time 21,446 plus any special votes.
Hugh : Christchurch Central is usually redder than an explosion in Wattie's tomato sauce factory , and yet today , Brendon Burns has burns , struggling to retain the seat for Labour .
......... is this surge into the blue-zone , and away from the red , a ringing endorsement of the incumbent government's good work in the earthquake response & recovery ?
Think in a disaster area people want the local MPs to be "in Government" not in opposition so things can get done - regardless of Party stripes.
Also as Chris Trotter mentioned last night the traditional blue collar worker Labour supportor may have moved onto being a contractor or in small business - so is more 'aspirational' minded than the previous Labour/Chch worker.
Hugh, looking at votes cast in greater ChCh's 7 electorates, 226,963 votes cast (incl specials) versus 251,539 in 2008. Accounting for a nationwide drop of 5.2% in turnout (despite 3%+ population growth), that means there were 11608 fewer votes with a 65% (reported) turnout for eligible (not just enrolled) voters, meaning a 17,900 decline in eligible voters. Hence with under 18s perhaps 22,000 decline in ChCh population.
That's a number reasonably consistent with the 10,000 decline in households listed in the new phonebook.
I think it would be reasonable to assume that the loss of population from Christchurch is currently between 20 and 25,000 persons.
I'm not so sure ChCh turned blue, certainly in ChCh Central and East much fewer (in actual number of votes cast) voted National than last election, in other electorates about similar numbers voted blue.
Certainly most people in ChCh don't understand what is going on, and therefore many people who think things are going well supported National. Another 3 years of muddling through will diminish that support, much like National support on the Coast fell after the handling of Pike River.
Worldwide news folks....
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/
"In Fiery Protest Against Fractional Reserve Lending, Disgruntled Ex-Employee of Chairman of Rural Bank of New Zealand Sets Car on Fire in Mall"
Is this the start of it?
Well unless they strip out the ability to vote as well National will be toasted...given in a Great Depression un-employment of 25% is quite probable thats a lot pof voters needing $....and this is looking worse....mind you just where the money comes from to pay is the big Q.......
regards
Suckers! (that's aimed at any fool who voted which just reinforces a system of corruption) When will you learn? Doesn't matter who you vote for, NONE are worthy. All will borrow from overseas and indebt future generations, ALL will sell out to corporations, ALL will NEVER have the guts to do what must be done that the people can't bare to face or own up too. DEBT!
Cheer up people! While not ideal, this was the best outcome out of what was available. Or did you want more tax to pay, a bigger "public sector" wasting your money, even more borrowing, even less productivity and even more unemployment? Or are you missing Labour telling you what to do and how to live your life?
New Zealanders have put all parties on notice....all of them have to think of rebuilding now, even the Nats...Nats, Labour and Maori party support going every which way...NZ First given another chance, Mana and the Conservatives ready to grow....interesting set of pieces ready for 2014............But wait, the board (the economy) may shake heavily and upset many pieces in the 3 years to come...
"We have lost, but we haven't lost hope and we haven't lost heart and what we've had over the last three years is a real building of our party," Ms King told Newstalk ZB. herald
.............."Hello Helen.....Annette here....any openings over your way....something involving spending other peoples money...anything...please....CLICK......."
"How many days do you think it will be before John Key will be using escalating current global debt crisis as an excuse as to why he cant do what he promised at election time;
If that happens Iain do you expect him to carry on regardless, or do you expect that he should have the magically powers to be able to forecast exactly what's going to happen that only you have ? Or perhaps you're just displaying a stupid political bias ?\
If Armageddon occurs, do you think that Labour's massive borrowing and spending plans wouldn't be curtailed as well ?
Bernard - suggestion, get Winston Peters in a for a double-shot interview. It'd be good to know what NZFirst do and don't support on www.changenz.co.nz how how NZF suggest we deal with the need to increase the retirement age.
Les, we don't need to raise the retirement age. The whole retirement hysteria is premised on the concern is that there are less workers for more dependants (baby boomers), but its a complete non event in my view, because the dependancy ratio is alot lower now that it was in the 1950s and sixties. There will be more elders to support, but families also have far fewer child dependants also. The population are having fewer children and when they do, its far later in life than in the past when people generally have greater disposable income to support them. What we need to do is cut living costs by improving housing affordability, and managing people's expectations when it comes to health and education, the costs of which have been rising faster than the general price level for the past 20 years. The National Party gutting Pharmac won't help with this.
Got the stats for that? Because it seems to me that while it's true that an average worker is supporting fewer children of his own than he would have been in the 1950s and 1960s, he is providing far more support for other people's children, and for other working-age, but not actually working, people, than he would have been then.
I've now had a look at the stats, and it is true that the number of dependents (young plus old) per working-age person is currently lower than it was in the 1950s and 1960s.
However, that doesn't in itself mean that the cost of dependency is any lower, for that is driven also by how much is spent per dependent - not only your own, but other people's.
The ratio is about to start rising again, and that is entirely due to the expected increase in the number of old people. And they are a lot more expensive, per head, than young people are.
Maybe not cause for "hysteria" - but most certainly not a non event.
In any case why should we "manage people's expectations when it comes to health and education" - but not when it comes to superannuation, the cost of which is also rising faster than the general price level?
And the Greens won zero electoral seats - ie there was noone actually living in a real area in the real world with sufficient management skills that people could choose to vote for. But they can take their group of 12 or so alternative reality, homeopathic, anti-American, Rudolf Steiner, anti science anti enterpise MPs into our Parliament on 120k+ salaries .... the $$$ for their salaries coming from taxes on the evil wicked cows from dastardly farms exploiting our grass and emitting into the beautiful air etc.....
Maybe you haven't worked out how the two vote MMP system works.
It sets out to find the answers to two questions.
One vote is to choose who people in an electorate wants as their electorate MP. The only people choosing are the voters in the electorate.
The second vote is for which party you support out the range of parties standing. The party votes are from everyone voting across the whole country. Representation in Pariliament is in proportion to these votes (save for the overhang).
How you decide which party to support is over to you. It may be based on the party list, it may be based on policy, it may be based on who is best at smiling and waving, it may be based on your sense of mischief, it may be based on a belief in a flat earth, ....
So two separate votes to answer two separate questions.
And the case of someone not being voted in an electorate but becoming an MP on the party list. It just means that enough people across the country were happy to support that party. Why should people in an electorate override that?
Well I looked at the votes for and against Dunne
13,228 for Dunne out of 33,990 cast (including informals). Which makes 38.9% voted FOR Dunne
And approx 61% voted for someone OTHER than Dunne.
Yet Dunne gets in and gives the nats another seat
For Epsom
14,150 voted FOR John Banks out of 31,395 votes cast. Or approx 45%
Approx 55% voted for Someone OTHER than Banks
Total Nat, Labour and Green and you get approx 16,200 votes... If Banks is the peoples preferred choice (note the word preferred) then I have a bridge to sell to you...
Again, Banks gets in, and gives the Nats another seat.
The Nats played these seats well. Going for party vote only. Labour / Greens played these seats poorly. They should not have stood anyone in Dunne or Banks seat.
If it is still FPP in those seats at the next election then they are a bunch of dummies
We are all aware of how the MMP system works (or not).
Well, I just think a large minority party should have at least 1 or 3 electorate seats - it seems more grounded and gives them more legitimacy. There is something about a local MP that is more accountable on a weekly basis & they have to face local people and explain their actions/policies.
Imagine if there were no electorate seats.... I guess that will be the next step/push to suit well salaried city dwellers who lean left - lets get rid of all that Blue out in flyover country!
Perhaps a better threshold under MMP would be that a party must have a minimum of at least 1 electorate seat and a lower party vote threshold of 3%. Thus pressuring the likes of Act and UF into a wider campaign. And pressuring NZ First & Greens to have at least 1 or 2 base electorate seats.
Parties such as Greens and NZ First bring in many MPs that Joe Voter has never heard of - electoral candidates face greater scrutiny then pure party list MPs. Even high ranked cabinet ministers still hold their electoral seats in high esteem/value, showing the respect that electorate seats have.
Then the smaller parties would have to resort to running a name or a celebrity in an electorate (maybe the Greens could ask Robyn Malcom) to get their proportional representation.
Dairy farmers have supposedly only been paying $1506 in tax each. I also would like to think that the Greens have worked out that in a prosperous economy there is more money available for conservation and the environment.
If a party doesn't have a local presence it will be so much harder to pick up party votes. That is why you find that, for example, green mps have bases/offices in different parts of the country.
The voting system you suggest of need for at least one electorate seat before getting to parliament is just an attempt to introduce a bastardised version of FPP
Better to go to an entirely proportional system I reckon, but then I think having views represented is more important than dictactorship government where lots of people aren't repsented (as happens under FPP).
Sun rose this morning, for a minute there I thought the world had stopped spinning, must remember rule number one; if it outside of my control, worrying and/or ranting about it will not change it, only increase blood pressure. Spend this time contemplating and planning ways to get through it.
i.e Where do I buy these assets that I didn't want sold. I believe they are a great investment for the country, and therefore probably a good investment for me.
The average voter continues to think of themselves as very close to the political centre.
Though Labour desribes itself as centre left , with its superannuation policy Labour had effectively moved to the right of National on that issue.
I think that the average voter perceives Labour to be on the left rather than centre left and National to be closer to the centre . In my view Labour lost a sizeable chunk of those centrist votes to National.
My question : Is the " centre " a fixed point , or can it shift ?
...... after 9 years of very centre-left policies ( 1999-2008 ) the electorate was sated with Nanny State ..... and meebee the John Keys years are the re-balancing lurch in sentiment to the right .
Even if Phil Goff expouses some centre-right policies , he is tarred with the ghost of Helen Clark & Michael Cullen ......
.... only if Labour purges the deck of the old hands , will they regain some legitimacy in the mind of the electorate ..... Out with the old , in with the new ......
We should be celebrating , Colin ..... the democratic process is alive and well in Godzone ! Two million or so of us did bother to get off our chuffs and went to polling booths ...... we ticked the little boxes , and gosh darn ...... we were spoilt for choices of candidates , parties , and election systems ........
..... Democracy was the winner , on the day . There's millions , meebee billions , of folks around the world who aren't so fortunate .
I raise a cup of good cheer to all those Kiwi individuals who exercised their democratic right , and voted . Well done !
Voters may well have done their part on Saturday, but lets not forget the role of our bureaucrats in slowing things down - final results are two weeks away:
The Electoral Commission aims to have the official results for the 2011 General Election and Referendum on the Voting System published here by 2.00pm on Saturday 10 December 2011.
I understand , and that is proof positive that bureaucrats have no place in business ...... they couldn't organise a bonk in a whorehouse .......
.... and winsome Winnie is back in the fray ......... oh ka-joo , ka-jay ..... this could take weeks to figger out !
Which is why I am right , and Bernard is wrong : We don't need more central government controls , regulations , and levers ..... we need much less .......
I love politics !
The Electoral Commission aims to have ....
Lets start by setting low expectations.
Returning officers have 220-250 thousand 'special' votes that they don't count, but if you are right, post from London or the electorate next door, to the local electorate returning officer.
The methodology was probably at the sharp end of technology in 1952.
Ye, back to normal!
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/election/a/-/12092968/comeback-king-peters-threatens-legal-action/
Wondered how long before the humour started!
Well as I live and breath.....all things I posted leading to the event come to pass.
Low voter turnout .......Nats romp home..!
Green steals more Labor vote than Nats
Don Brash proves beyond doubt even a witless fool can be a Reserve Bank Governor...when he inadvertantly installs his sucessor while sacking himself...what a confused senile old individual he must feel now.
...............kind of hollow I guess.
Winnie bullshits his way into the affections of the limp of mind and wrist....as I said the clasping of the Presidential podium showed the level of his experience...and that's what counts here.
Cunny poised as the lady in waiting smiles openly at the demise of his hapless leader....with a wink and a nod the knives will be sharpened.
I could go on but it's so exaustingly futile is it not.
I guess the point I'm making here is that all things Teagate included were so boringly predictable....that I feel we have been dumbed down to a soap opera ...you don't have to watch to see where it's going ...but you do ...! sadly.
I guess congrats are in order John Boy....on the bright side I get to kick your can some more over the next three years while you get about the place digging frigging great holes all over and spilling texas tea into our clean green blue blue sea.
P.S. Alex I'm sure a revision of some of your threads might raise a smile of a completion backwards kind.
What I found absolutely fascinating was John Key bringing up the German bond issue in post victory interviews with both tv1 and tv3. Most people don't even know what German bonds are, let alone how they might be associated with financial problems here in NZ, and it seemed an awfully odd thing to be mentioning almost straight after his victory. I got the feeling he's trying to warn people, it's pretty much clear to everyone in any position of political authority that things are going to be very rough the next few years.
Why would 1 million NZers refuse to vote? People in some countries die fighting for that right. I just don't understand kiwis. I understand that the political parties we have do not present much of a choice but still we can look for the lesser evil or closest match. At least use the vote to rock the boat or something.
Shane Jones said on TV on Sunday that he is concerned with the very low turnout of voters in the Maori seats. His comment that unless it can be turned around the Maori seats could go, was interesting. He thought there was a disconnect with young Maori. Perhaps there is a disconnect with young people generally.
That's a good point. The young are probably feeling less heard than they have for some while as the hangover from the recent debt orgy continues to rumble on and youth employment continues to creep up.
Maybe they should fix the election day to be ANZAC day every three years? I'd hate to think what those who served think of such an abysmal voting turn out.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.