The Dim-Post

November 10, 2011

Tricky

Filed under: Politics — danylmc @ 2:28 pm

Tim Watkin has a sneer at the ACT Party and makes this observation:

Key will also be looking intently at the polls. The worst outcome for him is that he has the cup of tea, only for Banks to lose the seat thanks to those utterly turned off by ACT and Labour supporters voting for National.

The worst outcome for Key is pretty bad. Say he has his cup of tea with Banks, sending a signal that National backs ACT in Epsom, and far-right voters around the country decide this means a vote for ACT is not a wasted vote, and ACT surges up to, say, 3.5% almost all of which comes from National. And THEN the voters of Epsom fail to give their electorate to Banks out of sheer bloodymindedness. The wasted ACT vote means National drops down to ~49% and Key needs Dunne, Turia and Sharples to form a government.

30 Comments »

  1. You assume Dunne returns…

    Comment by MeToo — November 10, 2011 @ 3:00 pm

  2. And wouldn’t Mr Key be charming to Paul Goldsmith should he win over Banks.
    “Oh you clever chap Paul. Come in. Well done. No your drink is quite safe old boy.”

    Comment by ianmac — November 10, 2011 @ 3:05 pm

  3. You assume Dunne gets in…

    As it was made abundantly clear on Backbenches a couple of weeks ago, neither the Green nor the National candidates are committed to seeking the electorate vote. That leaves Chauvel and Dunne. I think the latter’s chances are pretty darn good in the face of that opposition…

    Comment by Sam — November 10, 2011 @ 3:18 pm

  4. The meme that won’t die – that John Banks will lose Epsom. It makes the assumption that the people of the undoubtably true-blue electorate all hate Banks so much that they would rather see a Labour government in power. I find that extremely hard to believe.

    Comment by MacDoctor — November 10, 2011 @ 3:26 pm

  5. “That leaves Chauvel and Dunne.”

    Fuck that’s depressing. Almost, but not quite, as grim as having to choose between Banks and his hagiographer. However, at least there the choice is clear; vote for the guy who doesn’t want you to vote for him.

    Comment by Guy Smiley — November 10, 2011 @ 3:28 pm

  6. I beg to differ….the worst outcome would be that anyone would take any notice of what Key has to say. They should instead use their own free mind to choose who to vote for.
    And U(no)Future are no competion for Chauvel. Horay the hairdos’ days are nearly over.

    Comment by keep it real — November 10, 2011 @ 3:30 pm

  7. With the exception of 2005, the ‘wasted’ vote in our MMP elections has averaged 5.75% (very roughly). Therefore, Key only needs National to win a little more than 47% of the vote to hold half the seats in Parliament and govern alone.

    Comment by Phil — November 10, 2011 @ 3:33 pm

  8. And U(no)Future are no competion for Chauvel. Horay the hairdos’ days are nearly over.

    Oh-Bel is a solid “Blue Team” electorate. Shanks is a non-entity for electorate vote. Dunne will get home comfortably.

    Comment by Phil — November 10, 2011 @ 3:37 pm

  9. I beg to differ….the worst outcome would be that anyone would take any notice of what Key has to say. They should instead use their own free mind to choose who to vote for.

    So presumably this logic would apply to Goff as well, right?

    Loving U(no)Future as well. Barbed yet subtle.
    Danyl – you could take a leaf out of keep it real’s book to see the true meaning of satire, Red Alert style.

    Comment by Gregor W — November 10, 2011 @ 3:45 pm

  10. It makes the assumption that the people of the undoubtably true-blue electorate all hate Banks so much that they would rather see a Labour government in power.
    ? No it doesn’t? It makes the assumption that some percentage of the loyal true-bluers are sick enough of ACT to send a message, some percentage are not up on all the political intrigue and will vote National reflexively and the small centre-left that does exist there all vote tactically for National. Enough to just scrape Goldsmith in ahead of Banks.

    And given how low ACT are currently polling for party vote I really don’t see a huge overall outcome difference if Goldsmith takes it and ACT don’t make Parliament.

    Comment by garethw — November 10, 2011 @ 3:52 pm

  11. I live in Epsom, and I’m leftish, so I’m voting for Banks.

    Rationale: this election’s gone already, and the best bet for 2014 is that Key’s second term is derailed by a nasty fight on the right. Brash (definitely) and Banks (less so) aren’t going to Parliament to support soggy sops to swing voters and the Maori Party. Let’s get them on the telly every night for three years, bickering about the Nats and each other, starting with Banks’ leadership coup (“Breaking news … it’s a tie, one vote each!”).

    Save ACT! The friend of my enemy who becomes the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Or something.

    Comment by sammy — November 10, 2011 @ 4:46 pm

  12. keep it real – you might try taking the advice of your moniker…

    Chauvel gained a quarter of the electorate votes last time, Dunne almost a half. That’s quite some swing you’re describing in order For Chauvel to win with ‘no competition’. Wishing so don’t make it so…

    Consider also that more people in the electorate voted National in the last election than voted Labour, and you’ve probably got an even tougher task.

    However much we might dislike Dunne, he is an effective local MP, and that is what he is voted into parliament as – not for anything to do with United Future. I’m predicting he’ll be back again, albeit with a reduced majority perhaps.

    Comment by Sam — November 10, 2011 @ 5:02 pm

  13. Sam, I think you’ve got the results for the 2005 election. In 2008 Chauvel was only about 1000 votes behind Dunne.

    http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electionresults_2008/electorate-35.html

    I tend to agree that if Chauvel wins, it won’t be with ‘no competition’. But it won’t take much of a swing to push out the bouffant one…

    Comment by Dr Foster — November 10, 2011 @ 5:19 pm

  14. “all hate Banks so much that they would rather see a Labour government in power”

    that assumes Banks will bring in more than just himself. If ACT fail to get enough party vote for more than 1 MP then there is no substantial advantage to National of Banks winning Epsom. Goldsmith’s vote is worth just as much in the house as Banks’.

    ACT losing Epsom doesn’t affect Labour’s chances much unless they look like getting a non-negligible party vote result

    Comment by nommopilot — November 10, 2011 @ 5:30 pm

  15. “The wasted ACT vote means National drops down to ~49% and Key needs Dunne, Turia and Sharples to form a government.”

    If this happens, a lot of political commentators will be applauding Key for offering the Maori Party a seat around the cabinet table when he didn’t need them, so that when he did need them, he already had an ample stash of goodwill.

    Comment by Hugh — November 10, 2011 @ 5:49 pm

  16. It’s a pretty interesting multiple equilibrium situation. If ACT look like losing Epsom they won’t get close to 3.5%. If Banks looks to be winning comfortable their party vote might get that high. If I’m right about this then the tactics get conditional and complicated, but, pace Sammy, not sufficiently complicated for the left to vote for ACT — killing ACT is the best thing the left can hope to get out of this election, and I doubt their survival damages National in the short or long run.

    Also note that the “worst case” for Key is better than the best case for Goff.

    Comment by bradluen — November 10, 2011 @ 6:01 pm

  17. @Macdoctor: 1. The National candidate is polling above Banks, I believe, so it’s not exactly impossible that they will win. 2. Labour won’t form the next government, whatever happens in Epsom. I think that’s pretty obvious.

    Comment by repton — November 10, 2011 @ 6:55 pm

  18. I’m hoping that after the election ACT get 2 MPs and Key offers them one ministerial portfolio. It’ll be great to see ACT’s two great ‘saviours’ fighting over who gets it.

    Comment by NN — November 11, 2011 @ 4:16 am

  19. It is extremely unlikely National could win 49% of the vote on their current polling let alone if ACT got 3.5%. No one has ever managed to get over 50% before and certainly Key’s is not the most popular Government there has ever been. Maybe if they start polling ~60% they stand a chance of 50% on the day.

    Comment by Rob — November 11, 2011 @ 8:53 am

  20. Ahh Dr Foster – mea culpa… I was looking at Wikipedia and assuming that there most recent data was from the last election. Someone needs to do an update on the Ohariu-Belmont page then….
    I agree with your conclusions fwiw…

    Comment by Sam — November 11, 2011 @ 9:20 am

  21. No one has ever managed to get over 50% before

    We’ve had only 5 MMP elections. At some point during this, and all subsequent, electoral cycles it’s inevitable that some part of the process will break out from a preconcieved ‘rule’ of politics.

    I see no funmdamental reason to believe that it couldn’t be the ‘magical’ 50% mark.

    Comment by Phil — November 11, 2011 @ 10:39 am

  22. certainly Key’s is not the most popular Government there has ever been

    Not so certain about this, though it depends on how you define most popular. (Sid Holland got 50% a couple of times but those were pretty straight up two-party elections, and a bigger proportion despised him than currently despise Key.)

    Basically financial crisis and earthquakes have meant that Key’s only performance criterion has been to ensure things haven’t gone further south than they were a couple of years ago, and he’s achieved this. Meanwhile he’s a master at selling better times just around the corner, and hasn’t scared anyone except those of us on the paranoid left. Like Holland, though, he owes a little to an aging and ineffectual opposition.

    Comment by bradluen — November 11, 2011 @ 11:32 am

  23. The Tiresome Tea Ceremony is over, and John Key reveals a whole new moral code for political candidates:

    “I’m not telling anyone to vote in a particular way because I don’t think it’s right to tell anyone how to vote”

    New National Billboard: “Choose a Brighter Future. Party Vote … Whatever.”

    Comment by sammy — November 11, 2011 @ 5:44 pm

  24. So John Key won’t be voting ACT but wants others to, thus making him not unhappy. Case of…

    Do as i say not as i do

    hypocrite much ?

    Comment by pollywog — November 11, 2011 @ 8:38 pm

  25. Sam, latest poll in Ohariu – small sample size and high number of undecideds – but the story is framed as “Dunne’s hold is shaky”, which may influence how some people there vote:
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/campaign-trail/5954009/Dunnes-hold-on-Ohariu-shaky-poll

    OTOH Dunne is a strong campaigner.

    Comment by MeToo — November 12, 2011 @ 3:55 pm

  26. I wonder what Goldsmith has do do to lose the seat. AFAIK you can’t withdraw after nomination day (and a resignation after being elected doesn’t affect the MMP threshold). The death of a candidate cancels the poll, and I don’t think the subsequent by-election affects MMP either, so self-immolation won’t cut it.

    He’d just need to be caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.

    Comment by Rich — November 12, 2011 @ 5:12 pm

  27. The MSM and the left are positively frothing at the mouth speculating the outcome of the Epsom vote; most of it wishful thinking. As an Epsom voter I can tell you that we can count and that Banks will fly in. I am puzzled by the outrage from the left (particularly Goff’s declaration that it is a rort and that Labour will change the MMP rules in the Electoral Act – unilaterally mind – forget the review) when they were quite happy to accommodate Anderton in Wigram in the hope he would drag in more of his ilk. Hypocrisy?

    Comment by Peter S — November 12, 2011 @ 10:38 pm

  28. Is it true john banks is offering free vodka to school-kids if he wins ????

    Peter dunne?? a ship jumping rat with the hairdo of a serbian war criminal.

    I’ve heard theres a wikileak cable involving him😉 ….. and its not very flattering

    Comment by Pete w — November 13, 2011 @ 5:07 am

  29. Peter dunne?? a ship jumping rat with the hairdo of a serbian war criminal.

    That’s not a hairdo, that’s his common sense.

    Comment by Joe W — November 13, 2011 @ 9:19 am

  30. Watkin I regard as a lightweight thinker but I do confess this observation of his has brought a delighted smile to my curmudgeonly face.

    Comment by peterlepaysan — November 14, 2011 @ 8:30 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: