Observations on the 2017 Election campaign… (tekau)

By   /   October 8, 2017  /   21 Comments

TDB recommends Voyager - Unlimited internet @home as fast as you can get

At 2PM today (7 October 2017), the Electoral Commission announced the final vote results, including some 446,287 special votes cast (17% of  total  votes cast).

As a result, National has lost two seats and the Greens and Labour each pick up one seat in Parliament. The Green’s  Golriz Ghahraman and Labour’s Angie Warren-Clark enter Parliament on the Party List.

.

.

At 2PM today (7 October 2017), the Electoral Commission announced the final vote results, including some 446,287 special votes cast (17% of  total  votes cast).

As a result, National has lost two seats and the Greens and Labour each pick up one seat in Parliament. The Green’s  Golriz Ghahraman and Labour’s Angie Warren-Clark enter Parliament on the Party List.

The final seat counts and voting figures:

.

Acknowledgement for graphic: Radio NZ

.

Acknowledgement for graphic: Radio NZ

.

The results show a decisive  swing against National:

Election Results

.

.

Observations

(1) The rise of Labour (aka, the “Jacinda Effect”) appears to have stripped support from the Maori Party, NZ First, and the Greens. Any shift of voters from NZ First to National was insufficient to boost the Nats percentage of total votes.

(2) As expected, Special Votes have favoured the Left.

(3) Winston Peters has been proven correct to wait before Special Votes were counted and announced before initiating coalition talks. A National-NZ First Coalition (65 seats) would prove little different to a Labour-Green-NZ First coalition (63 seats).

With only a two seat difference (three, with ACT), Peters is in a better position to consider a three-way coalition with Labour and the Greens. The question is, will he align himself with the 1,152,075 who voted  National – or the 1,305,333 who voted against the Nats, and supported Labour, the Greens, and NZ First?

National may be the ‘largest’ party in Parliament – but the largest bloc of voters was Labour-Green-NZ First.

Choose wisely, Mr Peters, choose wisely.

.

.

.

References

Radio NZ:  Election17 final results are coming

Radio NZ:  Final Election17 Results – UPDATED

Wikipedia:   New Zealand general election, 2014

Electoral Commission:  New Zealand 2014 General Election Official Results

Electoral Commission:  2017 General Election – Official Result

Other Blogs

The Standard: And the final result is…

Previous related blogposts

Election 2014; A Post-mortem; a Wake; and one helluva hang-over

Observations on the 2017 Election campaign thus far… (tahi)

Observations on the 2017 Election campaign thus far… (rua)

Observations on the 2017 Election campaign thus far… (toru)

Observations on the 2017 Election campaign thus far… (wha)

Observations on the 2017 Election campaign thus far… (rima)

Observations on the 2017 Election campaign thus far… (ono)

Observations on the 2017 Election campaign thus far… (whitu)

Observations on the 2017 Election campaign… (waru)

Observations on the 2017 Election campaign… (Iwa)

Once Upon a Time in Mainstream Media Fairytale Land

.

.

.

.

.

= fs =

***
Want to support this work? Donate today
***
Follow us on Twitter & Facebook
***

21 Comments

  1. Michael says:

    Frank, you assume all NZF voters do not support National. It is likely that many NZF supporters also like National and would prefer a National/NZF coalition for a “strong and stable” Government. As such, no one can fully buy into the idea that all the people who voted for Labour, Greens and NZF voted to change the government.

    • Frank, you assume all NZF voters do not support National. It is likely that many NZF supporters also like National and would prefer a National/NZF coalition for a “strong and stable” Government.

      Well, as English pointed out, if some NZF supporters “also like National”, cut of the “middle man” and tick National for the Party Vote.

      It’s impossible to ascribe any particular motives for NZ First voters. But the billboards, with Peters face on it, stated “Had enough?”. This suggested a party that was offering something different to the current regime.

      • Michael says:

        I don’t think we can buy into that, as much as I would like to. Remember 1996 and how disparaging Winston was towards National? He was campaigning on changing the government back then and still went with National.

        • Indeed, Michael, let’s hope he’s learned from that.

          I have an upcoming blogpost on this issue.

        • Once was Tim says:

          And by harking back to 1996 as you and media pundits are prone to do, you assume Winnie hasn’t learned lessons (or got learnings going forward, if you prefer.)
          They also talk about MMP from an FPP perspective – EVEN NOW ffs! Then…occasionally concede a gradual maturity – or in the case of the right (read centre right), a ripening to the point of the rotten and rotted.
          I DO actually remember 1996 – like it was yesterday. Short term memory is more of a problem.
          My bet is you’ll be surprised with whatever option Winnie takes and any conditions that go with it

        • Danyl Strype says:

          That’s true Michael, but the 1996 outcome was *very* bad for NZ First, which was torn apart, and barely scraped back into parliament in 1999. Winston then supported Clark’s government for 3 terms, with much less destructive results. NZ First were sabotaged by dirty politics in 2008, which helped to bring the NatACT government to power. NZ First have been consistently kept out of that government (thus their antipathy to the Māori Party, UF, and ACT), and have voted with Labour and the Greens against NatACT policy much more often that they’ve voted for it. Even if Winston hadn’t learned anything from these experiences, which is unlikely, the NZ First caucus and the rest of the party most likely have learned from these lessons.

    • CLEANGREEN says:

      Sorry Michael,

      Like Frank we know Winston and spoke to him recently in Gisborne, and publicly he said to over 200 at that meeting if you want regional rail you need to change the government, and the poster he was standing as he spoke this was the one we all have seen with him smiling and words across the poster read’ “Have you had enough”?

      Those words say it all don’t they.

      • Michael says:

        I hope Winston’s decision is consistent with his rhetoric. However, to have any faith on this being so is foolish.

        Side note: Ardern’s media conference yesterday was interesting as the subtext was that they had not ruled out giving Winston the PM role. If that’s what gets Winston across the line then so be it.

        I’d like nothing more than to see the disappointment in the faces of the smug Nats if Winnie rejects them.

  2. bert says:

    You’ve got to love Rodney Hide’s bias…

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11929786

    One question Mr Hekyl or Mr Hide, why did you not think the same about your one man Act party that is,Seymour and how much power he had?

    If this was your last Sunday Herald column Mr Hide, thank Christ! Hypocrites, I have no time for.

    • Read it, Bert. Methinks Mr Hide is a man with a mouthful of sour grapes…

      Evidently MMP was ok when ACT had nine MPs in 1999 and 2002, and in 2008, four MPs rode in on Rodney Hide’s “coat tails”…

      ACT – the party where hypocrisy knows no boundaries.

      • bert says:

        Yes Frank, concur wholeheartedly!

        • CLEANGREEN says:

          Yes also on Q+A did you see the idiot Richard Pebble also stick his foot in his mouth and make an ass of himself at the same time, god it was so awful.

          Pebble said all the hunger was caused just by the cost of cigarettes, and he said that hunger would be removed if the cost of them was lowered!!!!!!!!

          Why did TVNZ allow this idiot to be included in the panel today?????

      • Once was Tim says:

        And they’d be grapes picked on some Martinborough or Marlborough orchard by a few indentured labourers. It was a pleasure to see him almost choke on them on Q+A this morning as he spat the pips. But the guy is so ideologically driven and thick skinned he didn’t even realise (or blush) when those present were calling bullshit.

    • WILD KATIPO says:

      Yes ,… it seems peculiar that a few years ago Mr Hyde was the victim of govt surveillance appendages ,… yet he advocates for the very same govt that this happened under…

      And as for trying to pin this stuff about Greens and NZ First being the ‘3 headed monster’ … what a laugh. Can these far right wing extremists not count ?… United Future , Maori , ACT and the National party…

      That’s FOUR last time I was at school.

      And as for ACT , – that’s a most ridiculous situation if ever there was and that party should never have been in parliament.

      And btw , speaking of extremists , – and of ACT and this govt in particular:

      … ” We don’t like extremists, – we believe in laws and policy’s that support the mass majority of New Zealanders , and not just a small elite ,… who may have gotten control of the political system and the financial funding of political party’s , … shows that in this campaign ” …– Winston Peters, 23/9/2017.

  3. Nitrium Nitrium says:

    “National may be the ‘largest’ party in Parliament – but the largest bloc of voters was Labour-Green-NZ First.”

    Well the largest block is factually National-NZ First (by two seats). After all, if NZ First wanted Labour or Greens they would have voted Labour or Greens. What NZ First voters want first and foremost is Winston, and they’re going to get him regardless. Especially since there is zero imagination in this country to even consider a National-Labour (or “purple coalition”) government, which would instantly sut out all the minor parties and create a super majority. Indeed, to my amazement pundits are advocating National-Greens, who have FAR less policy in common than Labour-National!

    • Danyl Strype says:

      This election has been heavily partisan, with the result that a lot of voters can gone back to the legacy parties of government (National and Labour). I wonder if the demise of the smaller parties over the last couple of elections might be a case of pruning dead wood to make space for new growth? Perhaps once there is a change of government (whether this year or in 3 years), we might see a resurgence of the surviving medium parties (Greens and NZ First), and/ or some new parties emerging and getting the critical mass to get seats in parliament for the first time.

      • Nitrium Nitrium says:

        Maybe. Most developed countries that run fully democratic elections (i.e. NOT FPP), have true centre parties (e.g. that of Angela Merkel) that are more often than not the largest parties but nonetheless have to work with other parties from both political sides to form a government. NZ First is not a genuinely politically centre party imo. He’s basically a right-wing communist (i.e. an oxymoron) holdover from the Muldoon era.

  4. CLEANGREEN says:

    Well sumarised frank,

    I can see SS Joyce every night now waking up screaming this set of numerics as he is so god awful at adding isn’t’ he??

    “With only a two seat difference (three, with ACT), Peters is in a better position to consider a three-way coalition with Labour and the Greens. The question is, will he align himself with the 1,152,075 who voted National – or the 1,305,333 who voted against the Nats, and supported Labour, the Greens, and NZ First?

    National may be the ‘largest’ party in Parliament – but the largest bloc of voters was Labour-Green-NZ First.

    Choose wisely, Mr Peters, choose wisely.”

  5. […] Observations on the 2017 Election campaign… (tekau) […]

  6. […] Observations on the 2017 Election campaign… (tekau) […]