Hard News: Where are all the polls at?
216 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 5 6 7 8 9 Newer→ Last
-
Trevor Nicholls, in reply to
I am going to make my call - A Labour-Green 62 seat win on the back of a late swing to Labour.
Here's hoping.
-
John Farrell, in reply to
Interesting, Tom. My pick - Labour/Greens 62 seats, National 56, Maori Party 2. No seats for anyone else.
-
If the skewing effect on the polls since advance voting started is real, highly-motivated voters who are quick off the mark will already have been tallied prior to the polls closing tomorrow and the first media reports thereafter will be of their tally.
If they mostly want a change of govt we'll see evidence of a swing to Labour/Greens as these first counts are reported - but later in the evening it'll even up (due to most traditionalists voting tomorrow). If this effect happens, early electorate results may contradict recent polling to a surprising extent, but then things will even out later in the evening...
-
I'd say there's almost no chance of Labour/Greens having 62 on election night, and even L/G plus Maori Party is a long shot.
But the real concern is that there will be negotiations based on incomplete numbers, and specials will change the picture (i.e. give the only correct picture) after the narrative has been established. It could be the 2017 version of 2005 "the rural booths came in and National had won, only to be robbed by the big urban booths at midnight". Obviously it's idiotic to pretend that votes have different values depending on when they are counted, so ... thank goodness there are no idiots in our media, and they all totally understand MMP (*cough* Hosking ...).
On the plus side, the prospect of National celebrating a "win" and then specials taking away a seat or putting the Greens over 5% would be one to savour ...
-
Alfie, in reply to
due to most traditionalists voting tomorrow
I wouldn't call myself a traditionalist and I was inclined to vote early. The reason I've held off voting until Saturday is because I like being able to drill down in the ElectionNZ site, right down to my local voting booth. For the last two elections it's been overwhelmingly Green with Labour 2nd and the Nats hardly count. That makes you feel pretty good about your neighbours.
Had I voted early I would be counted in one of the bigger voting places, rather than the nice little village where I live.
Two ticks Green.
-
Bernard Hickey reckons the polls might be wrong.
Currently, the two major published polls put National ahead of Labour by eight or nine percentage points, but those polls have assumed that turnout rates among the young will be the same as for previous elections.
...
If the young have voted at greater rates, that would mean the polls are likely to have underestimated the Labour and Green votes because they assume the same turnout rates for various demographics when they do their sampling and re-weighting of results. Polls have shown young voters are more likely to vote Labour and Green. -
izogi, in reply to
I'd have voted early but, after seeing how many are doing so and the discussions about outdated electoral laws, I've held off. It's occurred that this might be the final election where I get an opportunity to vote on a day when nobody's allowed to scream at me about how I should vote.
-
If it's possible to vote in person I usually do, but it's a bit of a hassle to get to the High Commission at present.
-
Kia ora koutou.
Just a reminder that the provisions of the Electoral Act are about to come into force, till 7pm tomorrow, so if you could please confine yourselves to electoral and poll geekery and no indulge in anything referring to the parties contesting the election, still less what you think of them, that would be much appreciated.
-
linger, in reply to
That’s not quite how it’s supposed to work. The previous day's advance votes are not tallied until 2pm on polling day – but the actual results are not scrutinized and therefore are not released until after close of polls. Special votes (including some proportion of the advance votes) take even longer to be assigned to their correct electorate – and may be decisive this time.
[Oh bugger, it’s already Saturday NZ time. Check: no party named, no recommendation made <=> post unproblematic I hope] -
Dennis Frank, in reply to
The previous day's advance votes are not tallied until 2pm on polling day – but the actual results are not scrutinized and therefore are not released until after close of polls.
Okay, but I was commenting on the basis of seeing a couple of political reporters telling us that the results from advance voting are likely to be reported soon after 7pm. One would think they'd have inside knowledge to justify that expectation.
Also, if I were running the process efficiently I'd expect my counting team to report their tallies at the end of each voting day of the advance voting period, so the tallies get regularly updated, so as to enable today's count to be expedited. I grant our civil service haven't become famous for having a culture of efficiency. Anyway, we'll see early evening if the advance voting tallies get reported promptly.
-
Absolutely not. As of 2pm today we will know (roughly) how many advance votes have been cast but we will not know anything about how they have been cast. Processing the advance votes does start early – but given the number, will not be completed before the final day’s votes are also in. Far more important than any perceived efficiency is ensuring no influence on the continuing voting process.
-
FletcherB, in reply to
Also, if I were running the process efficiently I’d expect my counting team to report their tallies at the end of each voting day
If you do that, the tallies could get leaked and influence people who haven't voted yet...
I don't like that idea... I don't even like the idea of countries with multiple time zones (Aus, USA, Canada) reporting results from earlier time zones before polls have closed in later ones...
-
Some problems with Australia's postal yes/no 'referendum'...
https://www.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/97163982/australias-samesex-marriage-survey-corrupted-another-haul-of-votes-dumped -
Joe Wylie, in reply to
Some problems with Australia's postal yes/no 'referendum'...
The unfailingly excellent David Rowe.
-
Bugger!
(provisionally....) -
Polling averages made it Winston's choice, almost certainly so, and late polls were pretty much on the spot for what he'd be looking at for a choice, give or take the specials (go go magic late enrolment swing!).
Well done the pollsters again. Good old math and sampling doing it's thing again, second-guessing the people who understand the math about as useful as betting against the met-service these days it seems.
538 says don't trust the polls just because they're right a couple times, because the margin of error is real and undecided voters really do swing hard very late, but yeah, they were right again, eh. :)
-
And because there's no better place for it, my tri-annual, stop stealing people's seats and giving them to the big parties, you bastards, post.
First divisor 1.4, no threshold, from the night's results.
National 56 (-2)
Labour 44 (-1)
NZF 9
Greens 7
TOP 3 (+3)
Māori 1 (+1)
ACT 1 (-1, +1 overhang).Which is the same, except tens of thousands more people have a voice in parliament, and ACT could just die instead of the Nats giving them that lifeboat just in case anyone votes for them again.
-
More of the same, I guess, but I’ll be interested to see what’s happened after specials.
It’s a shame they take so long to come in because a government forming deal may well be done and dusted by that time. How does 16% of advanced votes being specials compare with previous years, especially given the absolute number of advanced votes was so much higher? https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/97170107/election-2017-jacinda-ardern-hoped-for-better-after-strong-national-result
Looking at some of the electorate results (eg Nelson) I once again think it’d be worthwhile using a preferential system for electorate voting. The higher number of options for non National voters seems to suggest vote splitting between similar candidates is a common thing in electorates, and I cringe when I see candidates and supporters complaining about that, but I don’t see preferential voting happening any time soon.
-
I see Joyce tweeted "I stand by the way we campaigned" - which says it all really - what loathsome lying lowlifes.
If National was really paying attention to 'the will (and mood) of the people' English would have announced they were seeking to form a government with The Greens, not Winston's motley crew. .
So here's hoping Winston wants to leave a legacy that shows he desires the best for NZ by working with Labour and the Greens to turn this 'ship' around.
...and Epsom - what's wrong with you people?
(is there something in the water?) -
izogi, in reply to
I see Joyce tweeted "I stand by the way we campaigned" - which says it all really - what loathsome lying lowlifes.
I find the tactics disgusting yet cannot help but think it still works. As long as people are content to respond to this stuff, it's always going to happen.
I guess there are a million ways to frame the outcome, but to me there are just a heap of people don't want things to change. An excuse for the status quo is needed, National throws it in front of its supporters, and it's accepted.
In 2014, the lying excuse was "but Dirty Politics is normal for all politicians!" (ie. everyone's as bad as we are). This year it was about $11 billion and non-existent taxes.
-
I don't understand where the Sunday Star Times gets it's figure of 1.2 million votes for National (or the idea of 'victory'?
New Zealand’s biggest-ever election turnout delivered National’s highest ever vote: 1.2 million. Last night, reports Adam Dudding, was a landslide.
National’s Bill English has blown away the stardust and stormed to victory with a record 1.2 million votes, defying all expectations. English has told the Sunday StarTimes the biggest-polling party has the ‘‘moral authority’’ to have first go at creating a coalition, and last night he claimed that authority. In a speech to supporters he said he was ready to stitch up a coalition with Winston Peters to form a ‘‘strong and stable’’ government.The Official Election results say: National Party - 998,813 with 100% counted (but not specials as yet)
http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/Bill is deluded if he thinks he has the 'moral authority' to have first crack at making a coalition - it is is up to all parties to make the negotiations they choose, and the chips fall as they may - after the campaign they ran they have no moral anything!
Whenever I hear them talking about a 'stable' government I immediately think of Animal Farm - I think a 'Stay Bill' government is what they really mean....
-
We're likely to get our first ever refugee into parliament due to the usual boost to the Greens from special votes. Golriz is a specialist in human rights law, so will add considerable value. Her bio describes her as Kurdish/Persian (Iranian).
As James Shaw has been pointing out, the three parties who campaigned to change the government have a substantial majority. Presuming they will collaborate is unwise: none of them signalled any such collaboration to the electorate in advance of the voting. The failure of the leftists to invest the MoU with any substance instead signalled to the centrists that they must keep supporting NZ First, so they did.
The congenital inability of leftists to comprehend that swing-voters are centrists who control the outcome of our elections is sociopathic. Most humans learn from experience. Leftists don't. It has long been obvious that our governments change when centrists can see a viable alternative government in waiting. The leftists who control both Labour & the Greens gambled that they didn't need to provide that collaborative design. A foolish gamble, competing instead of collaborating. Zero-sum thinking that fails to cater to our common interests.
Best outcome now depends initially on the extent to which Winston has already identified common-ground policy priorities with Labour/Greens. If he reaches a significant extent of consensus in the preliminary negotiations, a viable three-way coalition becomes more likely. I'm seeing the preliminary election result as a verdict on neoliberalism: as Gareth Morgan said, the nation voted on the basis of self-interest, and nearly half the country want the status quo. If Winston really sides with those who aren't getting the trickle-down, since he now has the opportunity to help shape a genuinely-progressive new government his negotiating strategy ought to prioritise that design.
-
linger, in reply to
1.2 million
Reckon they multiplied the % of votes for National by the total number of registered voters, rather than the number of actual voters. Muppets.
-
Trevor Nicholls, in reply to
The congenital inability of leftists to comprehend that swing-voters are centrists who control the outcome of our elections is sociopathic.
Would you like some fish with that chip on your shoulder?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.