Greens could be set for historic win



I have been very harsh on the Greens this term, but I have zero interest in relitigating those criticisms because right now, the Greens are facing their greatest possible electorate win next month and it has enormous impacts on the future of the Political Left in NZ.

Four amazing things are happening all at the same time for the Greens.

1 – The Greens have been relentlessly focused and disciplined in terms of messaging. They have put the Wealth Tax idea front and centre of the debate by demanding a fundamental redesign of the economic structure to tap new revenue streams created from untaxed wealth accumulation. We can’t fund better social services and infrastructure if we don’t have the taxation and we should only get that taxation from those sectors and individuals who are using their market position to milk us. The identity politics has taken a backseat to the pragmatic issues people struggling want answers to, and this has helped enormously!

2 – Labour’s incremental fecklessness and cautious nothingness has seen a wholesale landslide of Labour Left walking over to the Greens, I mean after that bullshit Captain’s Call on the Wealth Tax, why bother voting Labour? GST off my banana don’t mean jack shit.

3 – The re-emergence of Marama and the brilliance of Chloe in the debates is generating the kind of buzz that activists need to be enthused by to turn up.

4 – Demographics have changed and there are more Gen X and Millennials voting than Boomers and their fears and hopes and aspirations are not being catered to by ACT, National, NZ First or Labour.

When the Greens were part of Alliance they won 18% of the vote, but strip the Alliance away, the highest result the Greens have ever had was 11.1 in 2011.

TDB Recommends

I believe the conditions are rip[e for a 15% Green Party win plus two electorates.

The weakness of Labour has given the Greens a platform to shine on and they have.

The importance of strong bottom lines in any Labour/Green/MP supply and confidence arrangement will be as important as the level of protest the Greens decide to use against National and ACT’s far right romper stomper campaign from Opposition.

Either way the Greens are set to record an historic win and permanently reshape the political landscape either from inside or outside Government after October.

Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.

If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media


  1. This is the same Greens that you have railed against for their divisive “woke” behaviour. The same Marama that told us during the protest of love that white CIS men were all at fault? The same Greens who are doing such a wonderful job in wellington city. The same Greens that wanted to vote James Shaw out – for some reason they’ve never really explained except maybe he’s a male?

    Those Greens?

    I’m not seeing the love (and I’m Gen X)

    • It’s not EXACTLY the same Greens doing a wonderful job in Wellington City. Those Greens are into what a Minto describes as “bully building” and lycra. Fuck all life’s experience and a big lotto win sets them apart. And they’re prone to the occassional hissy fit as well, based on their exceptional egos

    • I don’t believe that trans rights is a human right that grants more life but I’m not going to bash them or some shit. Some how they’ll have to be accommodated.

    • The GP still has the Rainbow Policy on their website – It’s majorly influenced by Elizabeth Kerekere’s 2017 PhD thesis.

      There’s things in there I agree with eg, support for homeless trans people.

      But it also includes:
      “Prohibit hate speech on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, and sex characteristics.” [I guess that depends on what they count as ‘hate speech’]

      “Protect the privacy of trans, non-binary and intersex people; for example, previous name [ie ‘dead name’] registered sex details cannot be disclosed and are deleted on request.
      4.5. Ensure that official identity documents only include personal information that is relevant, reasonable and necessary and move towards ending the registration of sex and gender in identity documents.”

      Public funded medical and surgical transitioning based on self ID. [eg voice therapy & probably facial feminising surgery.]

      “Promote the use of gender-neutral and gender-inclusive language, particularly in local and central government agencies, documents and legislation.”

      Remove all barriers to transgender people competing in sports – [ IMO that shouldn’t mean natal males competing in female sports. I do agree with countering any prejudice, bias and discrimination against trans IDed males competing in male sports. ie Make males sports more welcoming to all gender non-conforming males, including trans IDed and gay males.]

      I don’t agree that ‘dead naming’ or ‘misgendering’ should be criminal offenses. Other people who change their name for other reasons continue to have their past names known for good reasons. Knowing people’s past history is really important in many cases, especially with respect to criminal offending.

      The rainbow Policy, and the GP Women’s policy want to keep stats on experiences of trans people, and on women, in order to monitor discrimination. How can they really do that if they remove all gendered language, from public and official documents.

      And the Rainbow Policy statement that,

      “Mana Wāhine is essential to restoring the traditional balance between women and men that our tīpuna experienced, so that we may address the historical trauma and gendered violence of colonisation affecting us today.” Seems to contradict a lot of their adherence to US neoliberal gender ideologue that they have imported.

      Some of the policy does depend on how its interpreted.

      • We’re not trying to make the perfect race we’ve had this debate Hittler lost it so hard he had to do himself in. Some how we are going to have to accommodate trans rights.

        • Yes, of course It is entirely possible to support trans rights (in housing, education, employment, health, etc) as well as supporting the sex-based rights of women and girls. It can be done without going into genderist magical thinking, language-manipulation and extreme over-reach around non-conformity to sex-based norms and stereotypes.`

          The Greens’ policies, when you dig down into them, show contradictions and muddled thinking around female biology and rights, and trans rights. They’ve created a Rainbow policy around Te Ao Maori concepts, and wrapped around with sex-denialism and gender identity ideology imported from the neoliberal US.

          If the worst of the Greens’ Rainbow policy becomes law, it’ll set back women’s rights, including lesbian rights, for many decades.

          The Greens have the most policies that I agree with, so I find their Rainbow policy extremely distressing, and currently have no idea what party to vote for. I would prefer for the Greens to follow their claims to follow the science when it comes to gender identity and the material reality of sex – not some of the dodgy research that Chloe Swarbrick referred to re trans suicide during he youth debate.

          The Nats, ACT and NZF will be very bad for women in many other ways, especially women in the lower income brackets.

          • 100% agree with this post, and I would like someone, anyone, to ask Chloe why she supports doing things to minors on the basis of evidence that multiple OECD nations has assessed as “low quality”.

            She is a smart cookie but she’s no scientist. Because for her a study either supports or does not support a point of view. That’s as far as it goes. She does not appear to understand that science is a culture-bound enterprise done by humans, and scientists can get caught up in crazes and can fudge data and do this all the time. All it takes is a couple of bad actors with an agenda and some dodgy statistics and you can generate studies that say that up is down.

            • – “definiendum” while claiming that the definition of a woman is complicated.

              The definition of a woman is scientific where as the definiendum are secondary characteristics of a woman ie not scientific.

              The definition of a woman could be said to be someone in possession of a vulva but the definiendum could be someone thing like soft cushy woman for cuddling so when the definiendum contains the definition of a woman in it then it becomes a circular argument. Yknow but my woman do this yeah buy woman do this yeah but woman do this yeah but woman do this and so on.

              It’s really not that complicated by assigning numerical values to the secondary characteristics contained with in the definiendum so if you are in possession of ball sacks then you get a -2 (negative two) but if you are in possession of a vag then you get a +2 then you can go down the list

              Adams apple
              Jaw line
              External recognition etc

              And assign each secondary characteristic a numerical value so that we can all agree on the thresholds for masculinity and feminity.

              • It’s not necessary. It’s a whole system thing. And the definition of male and female is the same across species (especially those of mammals). It’s based on gamete size.

                A male human has the reproductive system whose function, when fertile, is to produce small gametes (sperm). That system is fully integrated within the individual’s anatomy – and has a cluster of characteristics, including, greater muscle & bone strength, greater speed.

                A female reproductive system’s function is to produce large gametes (eggs), when fertile. The system is integrated in an anatomy with wider hips, more flexible muscle connections, including around the stomach area (built to expand during pregnancy), etc.

                Geneticists have found 6,500 genetic differences between human males and females.

                • We can still assign numerical values to those internal recognition characters so that we can definitively say okay you are a woman or a man by setting thresholds so if you’re a +1 you female if you’re a negative 1 you’re a male then proceed with life. We’re not going to build trans toilets. You lot cant even build state houses or a bridge. These things are just beyond you. So I came up with another option. It’s just an idea but I think it’s an idea who’s time has come.

  2. Just because the Greens are saying sweet words now doesn’t mean that they won’t revert to type post election, which is the politics of envy, and their ghastly divisive identity politics nuttiness.

    • I see your point but I disagree. I think plenty of people in the Greens have got the message: having a belief that colourblindness is good policy isn’t inherently evil, the current iteration of trans rights is not progressive, women’s rights matter, and you shouldn’t tell gender-non-conforming kids that they are broken and need to be fixed.

      I think those people will be much more assertive within the Greens post-election. They will say: when we talked about identity we were on 6%, when we talked about tax, inequality and the climate crisis, we were on 15%.

    • Its the same each election Snow White, 6mths out from the election they quieten down (notice how the normal loudmouth green MPs are silent at this stage of the election also) and actually release environmental policy….the other 2 and a half years they are all about identity politics and Trans this and trans that.

      • Well if you want things to be not the same, and you think some of the GP priorities are pretty good, join the party and make it clear what your priorities are (and are not) as an insider.

        • No, I’m not right just wants to obfuscate against any party left. He has no intention to offer anything intellectual. His only priority is standing on the outside throwing stones, never promoting the right( perhaps because there’s nothing to promote) just good old trolling.

        • That-guy. The Greens are the only pp I have ever donated to, but they’re age averse. I didn’t like Swarbrick’s “ OK Boomer “ to Brownlee in Parliament. It was a cheap shot. She also told VU students that experience doesn’t count, effectively dismissing the skills, talents, experience, expertise, thinking, wisdom, and knowledge which comes with the passing of the years, and which can be invaluable.

          • Swarbrick picking on Brownlee, give me a break! What did Brownlee say for Swarbrick to respond that way Snow White? You failed to mention that, maybe because it doesn’t sit well with your right wing thinking.

          • I agree SW. Those here poking you with a stick are defending the greens by conveniently disregarding the identity politics. If they vote for them knowing what they stand for that’s fine, but don’t defend identity politics by pretending it’s not there.

    • Snow White, maybe it is a politics of ‘equality’ and not ‘envy’. The facts are clear that our current tax system and economy drive increasing inequality and this is at the heart of many of our social problems. To continue to ignore this inbalance, and in some right wing polices increase it, is a recipe for continued social decline.

    • You’re beginning to worry me @ Snow White. Hopefully you’re not becoming another revenge voter.
      They’re ALL bloody ghastly, and that’s just the way we’ve allowed the political class to become. (Yea/Nah, more fool “us”)

      • Once was… “ They’re All bloody ghastly.” Correct. That Winston Peters suddenly becomes a voice of reason is surely some sort of evidence of this. He and Luxon now articulating the need to clear up the damaging gender ID ideology – and it’s ideology, not science – being imposed upon school children offers a small ray of hope, and one or both of them have been addressing dedumbing the education system. Bottom line has to be freedom of speech for all pressing issues needing to be addressed – the disproportionate transgender dialectic may even be another diversionary tactic.

  3. When Chloé leads, I’ll vote Green. Marama is all wrong as leader. She’s lost her way imo. She’s just their for the paycheck and “glory”. James is a decent bloke. But he never gets to wear the pants. He should.

  4. Go you Chloe Swarbrick ! A whoop while clapping and whistling!
    My dream is to see Farmers welded to each other via a good old fashioned Union then @ Maori weld themselves to farmers and The Green Party and then we all go back to a simple, old fashioned thus less easily corrupted, i.e. more transparent, FPP electoral system where voting is mandatory and then Chloe Swarbrick can be the best Prime Minister since 1936.

  5. When questioned about the Greens bottomline of a wealth tax during last night’s debate. Chris Hipkins again categorically ruled it out whilst he is PM.

    The Greens cannot deliver their economic policies without a wealth tax.

  6. Jimmy Shaw has been wheeled out to convince voters that the Greens don’t actually hate cis white males. After the election he will be deposed by Chloe, blinded and sent to a monastery to do penance for his original sin of being a cis straight white male.

    • This. Their immigration policy is slightly to the right of the National Party. Remember though, there’s nothing the “progressives” loathe more than the working class/filthy renters… at least Luxon has the decency and shortsightedness to call them bottom feeders. Tick. Tock.

  7. In retrospect, the best thing to happen for the Greens was the outrageous “cry baby” text from the now departed MP that sent it. Look, all political parties have factions, as evidenced by David Parker! chucking his portfolio on the table due to the PM’s Cap’n’s call on wealth tax.

    Greens have had great policy since they started and have moved a little to the left now–heh–a lot actually compared to NZ Labour.

    The good news is that progressive voters of whatever age, with a 21st century world view, do not have to be “tribal” they just need to vote any of Labour/Green/Te Pāti Māori to grow that potential Government bloc.

    It will be razor close in the end, particularly as more people get to know Incel fool Seymour.

    • I mostly agree except I actually think it might be strategic for the left to not party vote for TPM they’re unlikely to coat tail an extra MP looking at recent polls and a low party vote could generate an overhang if they get 4 electorates.
      Party vote Green and electorate vote TPM in the Maori electorates, Green in Auckland Central/Wellington Central/Rongotai and TOP in Ilam!

      • We are in “reckon” territory here…Green vs TPM…I guess that is why Bomber has been saying–don’t vote early–let’s see how all those polls are looking, even if they are basically bent in the respect of both observing and creating behaviour.

  8. Hardly a ‘record win’ when all they have done is cannablise Labour votes.
    A record number of MPs yes, but hardly a win when they will be on the opposition benches.
    Greens always over poll, let’s see where they end up on the 15th Oct.

  9. The bar is so low with the left, the mere fact that the Greens are not fucking up at this very moment is considered a WIN! I think that’s what Martyn means…it’s not like they are going to win the election or be in govt. So it has to be fact that Marama is shutting her mouth – a win!

  10. “The re-emergence of Marama and the brilliance of Chloe in the debates is generating the kind of buzz that activists need to be enthused by to turn up.”

    Indeed it is.

    It is great to see the re-emergence of these women leaders from behind the empty suit that is James Shaw, that Shaw has been invisible during this election campaign, that’s a good thing.

    Instead of using his profile as Climate Change Minister to publicly lobby the Labour Government to take real action on climate change, Shaw has wasted the majority of his tenure as Climate Change Minister, in back room negotiations with Right Wing National opposition MPs trying to get cross-party consensus with National on climate change, only to have it blow up in his face.
    Anyone with any political nounce knows National and ACT are the political representatives of the corporate polluters, who put profit above planet.

    The sooner this political lightweight is dumped as Green Party co-leader, for a real bare knuckle street fighter for climate action the better.

  11. WHY are the debates not focusing/questioning on the real life consequences of National’s uncosted tax cuts on the economy, as evidenced in the UK with Liz Truss tanking the British economy with exactly the same policy, in less time than it took a lettuce to wilt????

    WHY is National not been quizzed on what they would have done over COVID in their accusations that Labour was spraying money around to help people out?

    WHY is Chippy even allowed to make a ‘Captain’s Call’ in our parliamentary system, he is the Prime Minister, not the President. Prime Minister’s do not have the same unilateral abilities a president has.

  12. After months of being unable to decide between the Greens and Te Pati Maori for my party vote I think I’ve finally settled on Greens seeing them up and TPM down on recent polls, not only are TPM unlikely reach a high enough party vote to coat total a 4th or especially 5th MP but if they win 4 electorates then a low party vote could cause an overhang. Also TOP bumping up from 0.7 to 1.9 on the recent Newshub poll also makes me think Raf might actually have a shot in Ilam after all…
    If the left vote, the left win!

  13. oWhat about a troika. I have trouble with Marama after that self-indulgetnt defence in respect of females. But if she is there because of tacit Maori support and inherent wit plus women, then what about men? Is James good for the men overall. He may have done some good things that have not surfaced for long. The fact he was attacked isn’t enough to make him a leader – not time for simple sympathy.

  14. The only thing that is certain is the last burp of neo-liberal Labour short-termism is over. So, the prick, Hipkins, can fuck off to chippyland.

  15. The Greens have probably picked up some votes from TOP this week, there was enough left flavored TOP policy, and an opportunity to make the ‘we’ll sit on the cross benches regardless of who wins’ position an attractive/effective possibility in a tight result till Raf came over all ‘we’ll coalition up with NACT’ in his interview with Duncan Garner


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here