The Dim-Post

November 30, 2015

Just for the record

Filed under: Uncategorized — danylmc @ 9:03 am

I want to get down my early prediction for the 2017 election which, contra Rob Salmond, is that it won’t be close and that National will win very easily but probably won’t be able to form a government without New Zealand First. Key pointed out over the weekend that pundits always predict Peters will be the kingmaker and they’ve been wrong three elections in a row, but I think that short of a shock retirement or some other outlier that he will be this time around.

Update: Also, I’m gonna predict – although this one is more of a guess – that Judith Collins won’t be back in Cabinet. It strikes me that there haven’t been any scandals or disgraces in the National Party for a while. Sabin’s resignation is the last one I can think of. People are behaving themselves, or at least not getting caught.

The exception is Judith Collins who raised eyebrows promoting a car dealership in her electorate who gave her a new car to drive, an activity that turned out to be illegal for Ministers but not MPs.

Do Key/Eagleson really want Collins back in Cabinet skating extremely close to the law, conducting covert attacks on Cabinet rivals through the media, and repeatedly forcing the PM to grit his teeth and say that he stands by her? I doubt it. Maybe they’ll reckon its safer to have her in than out, but realistically it probably isn’t.


  1. National will win very easily but probably won’t be able to form a government without New Zealand First.

    In other words, if it were a FPP election, National would win easily. But seeing as it isn’t, National won’t win very easily.

    Comment by Ross — November 30, 2015 @ 9:19 am

  2. I’m not sure “National will win very easily” makes sense in this context. An easy win would be a government-forming majority. Are you still thinking in terms of National versus Labour?

    Comment by Bill Bennett — November 30, 2015 @ 9:27 am

  3. Current Labour management are appallingly bad judges of public sentiment. Its clear that National have taken this country as far left as anyone wants it to go. There’s no profit in seeking to take it any further left.

    Labor in Australia face the same problem. Their solution is going to be to replace the far left Bill Shorten with someone like Anthony Albanese and then take a couple of steps to the right. This will make them competitive with the left wing Turnbull govt.

    I’m not sure Labour NZ need to replace Little but on policy they definitely have to copy Australian Labor, and go right and not left.

    Comment by Redbaiter — November 30, 2015 @ 9:29 am

  4. Hope you are wrong. In the regions, Key’s star is falling to the point where he is almost more of a liability than asset with farmers. All these disaffected, previously rusted-on Nats will vote NZF, and they will be the big winner in 2017 I believe, to 12-15% but all coming from National. The upcoming “prominent NZer” court case will hurt Key. With all Peters’ new votes coming from Nat folk, he will almost cerrtainly look to go with National, despoite his current rhetoric, as it will give him more leverage as you indicate. And he has always wanted to be Keith Holyoake, not Michael Savage. But Nat-NZF will struggle to get over the line as there is unlikely to be any other parties on the right getting anywhere near 5%. Greens will probably be 12% so its all up to Labour to get the disaffected poor and Maori vote out. It looks like Little has seen the folly of attacking the Greens for 10% of their 12%. It will be close, but I’ve always believed that 10% of the electorate have no idea who they will vote for until the last day/hour, and these folk usually go “time for a change” for not other reason. 1 caveat: Little’s TV performances will need to improve a lot. He still stutters and stammers too much for the masses. My money’s on a very close win for the left.

    Comment by Jack Craw — November 30, 2015 @ 9:34 am

  5. We all should get out and vote National, so they don’t need NZ First to govern.


    Comment by Antoine — November 30, 2015 @ 9:35 am

  6. Do I need to point out that you have a terrible record when it comes to making predictions? Or is this some sort of “reverse psychology” for predictions?

    Comment by eszett — November 30, 2015 @ 9:48 am

  7. > Do I need to point out that you have a terrible record when it comes to making predictions?

    I suspect the aim is to scare Labour and Green voters into getting out and voting (to keep NZ 1st out of Govt) rather than to be 100% accurate.

    It’s the same tactic National uses, except the bugbear they invoke is the Labour / Greens / NZ First / Internet Mana hydra.


    Comment by Antoine — November 30, 2015 @ 10:01 am

  8. This is all very entertaining and so on, but I think I’ll wait to see what Claire Robinson predicts before getting too excited. At least she has the benefit of sometimes being right:

    Comment by Andrew Geddis — November 30, 2015 @ 10:03 am

  9. @jack
    Are you a professional pundit, or do you just pull numbers out of your ass for fun? 😛
    Here’s a contra prediction: National’s 2017 campaign in the provinces can be boiled down to a platform of: “Winston Peters has done nothing in Northland. He doesn’t give a fuck about country people or country problems.”
    It will work.

    Comment by Phil — November 30, 2015 @ 10:03 am

  10. National will ‘win very easily’ but won’t be able to govern without New Zealand First’, you say?
    I take it from this you think that New Zealand First will be absolutely committed to going with National?

    Comment by Can of Worms, Opened — November 30, 2015 @ 10:33 am

  11. All rather depends on Auckland property prices. If they’re up another 40% by December 2017, then it’ll be an easy win for National, all those millionaires won’t vote for anyone else.

    If they’re down 60%, with the banks either having crashed or looking like it, then it’ll depend if Labour and/or Greens are offering an alternative to the predictable National (probably English led rather than Key) solution of austerity and making ordinary people pay back the money the rich just stole.

    Comment by richdrich — November 30, 2015 @ 10:42 am

  12. it’ll be an easy win for National, all those millionaires won’t vote for anyone else.

    I think the proportion of millionaires among the voting population would be pretty small. Don’t forget that for every seller who might be happy with skyrocketing house prices, there’s probably a disappointed buyer or three.

    Comment by Ross — November 30, 2015 @ 10:57 am

  13. “…I think the proportion of millionaires among the voting population would be pretty small…”

    The proportion of National party supporting millionaire talking heads in the media ISA is, however, very, very high.

    Comment by Sanctuary — November 30, 2015 @ 11:03 am

  14. National haven’t won easily if they need NZF to form a government. At that point, NZF could throw its support behind a Labour-led coalition and push them over the line. That is, if they need NZF, National haven’t won at all.

    I get that it is fashionable to be negative about the left, to talk up Key’s chances of winning a historic 4th term, and to diss Rob Salmond, but what you’ve written makes no sense. Your description (that National will depend on NZF to form a government) is a very tight race.

    Comment by Onsos — November 30, 2015 @ 11:18 am

  15. National haven’t won easily if they need NZF to form a government

    I might be putting words into DMc’s mouth, but I think he’s suggesting the election result will produce a National/NZF governing coalition which doesn’t need any other party to hold power with 61 or more seats. A Labour-led coalition would require Labour, the Greens, NZF, and the Maori Party, to achieve the same result.

    Comment by Phil — November 30, 2015 @ 11:49 am

  16. Side note: can we all agree to stop calling this kind of discussion ‘prediction’?

    Paul the Octopus didn’t ‘predict’ the results of world cup games. Nostradamus didn’t ‘predict’ 9-11. Danyl’s not ‘predicting’ the outcome of the election.
    At best this is supposition, prognostication, or conjecture.

    Comment by Phil — November 30, 2015 @ 11:55 am

  17. ‘I want to get down my early prediction for the 2017 election’, said Danyl; I think we can accept that he is ‘predicting’, that is, that he is making a forecast.

    Comment by Onsos — November 30, 2015 @ 12:06 pm

  18. If Labour can form a government with the support of NZF, then National are perilously close to losing the election. There are lots of options, including NZF sitting on the cross-benches. A government which depends on Winston Peters is always close to failure. It;’d be all like, ‘Sure, Winston could change his mind at any time and bring down the government, but yeah it’s definitely a strong citory to National.’

    Comment by Onsos — November 30, 2015 @ 12:13 pm

  19. … an activity that turned out to be illegal for Ministers but not MPs.

    In my role as the poor man’s GEdge, may I just point out that it wouldn’t be illegal for a Minister to do what Collins did, just unethical and in breach of Cabinet rules (which ain’t laws). Having said that, I suspect you are right about Collins’ likely future. If Key is looking to a fourth term, going back to the future isn’t the way to go.

    Comment by Andrew Geddis — November 30, 2015 @ 1:00 pm

  20. If, say, National lost three seats and Labour picked up 2 and NZFirst picked up one, that would be a pretty huge win for National by pretty much any measure, but they would still need NZFirst to form a government (unless NZFirst abstained or something, which seems like an unlikely thing for them to do).

    Comment by danylmc — November 30, 2015 @ 2:11 pm

  21. I’m not sure how you can say that National losing 3 seats would be a “huge win” considering that the party might be unable to govern and thus would be in Opposition (barring fresh elections).

    Comment by Ross — November 30, 2015 @ 2:25 pm

  22. Danyl, don’t you think this is the logical outcome for a political system designed to stop Germany going to war again? My brother is a professional ecologist and was discussing government inaction on climate change with me. My reply to him was if we want a government that actually does anything substantive we need a longer political term and a political system that gives a ruling party a mandate to make tough changes. The ability to make serious real world change would galvanise the collapse of the two anachronistic opposition parties, to be replaced by parties based on a serious platform of issues that need to be solved.

    Comment by rsmsingers — November 30, 2015 @ 2:29 pm

  23. It’s two years away. Anyone seriously evaluating seat counts and voting patterns based on presumptions about an election that far away ought have a good think about how close they’ve pressed their nose up to a tree and wonder what forest might be beyond.

    Comment by Fentex — November 30, 2015 @ 2:30 pm

  24. Yes, I think you may be on the money; pun most certainly intended.

    National are playing an american game, which is to hoover up the votes of the greedy, by selling them ‘aspirational policies’ – people who don’t qualify for the tax cuts (& never will) are voting for those policies, because they aspire to wealth, and will support the wealthy in the errant belief that at some point, if they’re ‘good enough’, they will merit the kind of salary that puts them into the ‘tax-breaks’ salary bracket. Meanwhile, they watch salaries, allowances and job security erode, patting themselves on the back because it’s not their occupational class being affected – until, suddenly, it is. Media mavens wailing about the state of their ‘industry’ would be the classic case, right now.

    What is actually happening is that IT services are reducing the actual pool of jobs – IT consultants are literally causing creeping unemployment, due to the ‘efficiencies’ they are ‘creating’.
    Coding jobs out of existence has been going on for at least the last three decades, but it has become more furious under this Government since 2008.

    At the same time, pillorying the unemployed; especially those with higher qualifications, who have been sacked from white-collar jobs for ideological reasons (every feminist policy analyst ever employed in the public service, for instance …)
    The sacking of those who point out the (un?)intended consequences of some Government policies is supposed to stop any more whistle-blowers from leaking – this is part of the totalitarian project to stifle dissent, to demonise those who try to protect the vulnerable.

    Neo-liberal policies, while bad enough, are nowhere near as bad as neo-facist policies – and we are seeing an echo of 1936 Europe in the responses to the ‘border crises’ as refugees attempt to escape ISIS and associated war-mongers in the Middle-East. Watch the crackdowns on expression of dissent in Paris this week, for an object lesson.

    Comment by anarkaytie — November 30, 2015 @ 3:16 pm

  25. It is only a matter of time before National starts gassing the poor. Then Labo will be ready to pounce.

    Comment by Simon — November 30, 2015 @ 3:29 pm

  26. In 1984, 1990, 1999 and 2008 the “win” was pretty clear. Because of MMP, the result in 2008 was the closest (Winston could have hung on) but overall, there hasn’t been much doubt that changes of government have happened when the voters clearly wanted it.

    At this distance 2017 is looking more like 1996 or 2005. The “win” could go to either bloc, but the opposition (specifically Labour) will need to do a lot better to make it look like an inevitable tide.

    National’s problem is that they’re screwed without Key, and so he might just stay in the job only because his terrified MPs are round his ankles dragging him away from the golf course. And he’s not very good at disguising his “I’m bored with you lot” face.

    Comment by sammy 3.0 — November 30, 2015 @ 3:36 pm

  27. In hind sight some of the reasoning around A Prominent New Zealander becomes clear, cauterising the rot before the election had the potential to lose more than 1 seat, but leaving it until after meant that only 1 seat was at stake.

    Comment by Michael — November 30, 2015 @ 11:54 pm

  28. It is true that it is useless to predict this far away from the election, but worthwhile floating the notion that National started their election campaign in May this year.

    A clue was in the term ‘Long-term drivers of hardship’. Imo this will be pointed at other parties as an accusation. As for the others, they haven’t even finished picking their teams yet.

    Comment by Lee Clark — December 1, 2015 @ 5:43 am

  29. Good to see Danyl’s writing satire again.

    Comment by Stephen — December 1, 2015 @ 1:26 pm

  30. Since the crystal ball is out, what are the chances of the Auckland property bubble bursting before 2017? And the effect that would have on an election.

    Comment by Neil Miller — December 1, 2015 @ 2:17 pm

  31. >can we all agree to stop calling this kind of discussion ‘prediction’?

    Only if you can define what prediction is in a way that won’t cause my coffee to shoot out my nose.

    Comment by Ben Wilson — December 1, 2015 @ 8:36 pm

  32. >It is true that it is useless to predict this far away from the election

    Yup, but that’s only because National killed iPredict, so the fun is all gone now.

    Comment by Ben Wilson — December 1, 2015 @ 8:39 pm

  33. The Left used to cheer on Obama, now they’re reduced to cheering on Corbyn.

    If true to form, in NZ Minto will be the next Labour leader.

    Comment by NeilM — December 1, 2015 @ 11:22 pm

  34. The Left used to cheer on Obama, now they’re reduced to cheering on Corbyn.

    You’re like the worst kind of dull, broken record endlessly putting your words in the mouths of others.
    Please stop being boring, NeilM.

    Comment by Gregor W — December 2, 2015 @ 9:28 am

  35. Please stop being boring, NeilM.

    Also, could the moon please stop orbiting the earth and the tides stop flowing in and out.

    Moving on, but … it appears to have taken just over a week for one of Danyl’s predictions/hypothesis to be falsified. Heeeeere’s Judith!

    Comment by Flashing Light — December 7, 2015 @ 9:16 am

  36. Yep, it seems Judith is going to be back in Cabinet.

    Danyl really should stick to satire. 🙂

    Comment by Ross — December 7, 2015 @ 10:51 am

  37. Heeeeere’s Judith!

    In a cynical moment, I can only think of a couple of reasons why this would occur, excepting Loti-Iiga’s obvious incompetence:
    (i) Key feels secure enough in his own position that he can afford to be magnanimous to his enemies. He’s confident that he’ll get re-elected but then doesn’t give a shit about what Cabinet looks like after he gracefully departs.
    (ii) Joyce has pissed him off

    Comment by Gregor W — December 7, 2015 @ 11:30 am

  38. I hope Danyl’s other “predictions” prove similarly reliable.

    Comment by Higgs Boatswain — December 7, 2015 @ 5:24 pm

  39. I’m thinking that 10 years after National was elected on a platform of higher wages and prosperity even the dimmest among us may have begun to realise……it never happened.

    National re-elected? Maybe crippling the media will be of some help there……but then maybe more people will see the harm that’s been done. If National wasn’t rorting MMP in Epsom and Ohariu-Belmont, we would have a very different government.

    It won’t take much to change this game.

    Comment by Steve Withers — December 7, 2015 @ 8:32 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: Logo

You are commenting using your 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

%d bloggers like this: