Legal Beagle by Graeme Edgeler

Read Post

Legal Beagle: Election #11: Notings

26 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

  • Anita Easton,

    Do you happen to know, is the decision about the number of list seats for each party set already? Or does it wait until after recounts?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 21 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Anita Easton,

    Do you happen to know, is the decision about the number of list seats for each party set already? Or does it wait until after recounts?

    It waits until after the recounts. The overall number of MPs for each party is set, unless someone requests a party vote recount (they won't, I checked to see how close parties were to getting or losing one MP via the party vote and it wasn't particularly close). But exactly how many list MPs a party gets depends on how many electorates they get (e.g. if a recount showed Paula Bennett won Waitakere, National would gain one electorate MP and lose one list MP, and Labour would gain one list MP to make up for their lost electorate MP - to ensure they both had the right number of seats overall).

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3202 posts Report Reply

  • Anita Easton,

    Thanks :) When I read the leg it looked like the list determination happened after the declaration in s179, and so would occur in parallel with recounts, which could lead to disproportionality if there was a change at recount.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 21 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Anita Easton,

    which could lead to disproportionality if there was a change at recount

    Disproportionality does occur if the change happens because of an election petition, however. But thanks for the thought, you’ve given me an idea for another short post :-)

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3202 posts Report Reply

  • Grant McDougall,

    I predicted here a few months ago that Paula Bennett would lose her electorate seat and so it has came to pass...just.

    Dunedin • Since Dec 2006 • 759 posts Report Reply

  • Joshua Arbury,

    Also interesting too see that if everyone who voted Garth Hughes had voted for Chauvel then he would have won Ohariu. Also all those Parker/Hay votes in Epsom would have elected Goldsmith and kept Banks out.

    Lefties really need to learn how to vote strategically.

    Auckland • Since May 2009 • 237 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Joshua Arbury,

    Lefties really need to learn how to vote strategically.

    I think you mean tactically. Who's to say they weren't voting strategically?

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3202 posts Report Reply

  • Joshua Arbury,

    Fair point on semantics Graeme.

    I realise some Green voters hate Labour as much as National/Act/UF. I just wonder whether it's still not getting through that vote splitting is fine.

    Auckland • Since May 2009 • 237 posts Report Reply

  • Phil Lyth, in reply to Joshua Arbury,

    Lefties really need to learn how to vote strategically.

    It's a heroic assumption to think that everyone would vote Goldsmith (or Chauvel) if Parker / Hay (or Hughes) had not been on the ballot paper.

    Interesting to note (I haven't pulled the numbers yet) that the candidate informal votes were generally several times the number of party informal votes in each electorate.

    That is, there were a lot more people who knew the party they wanted, and not the candidate, than the other way around.

    Wellington • Since Apr 2009 • 458 posts Report Reply

  • Richard Aston,

    Thanks Graeme ,
    What is your predictions on the Judicial recounts ? In your experience do they change the result?

    Northland • Since Nov 2006 • 509 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown, in reply to Grant McDougall,

    I predicted here a few months ago that Paula Bennett would lose her electorate seat and so it has came to pass…just.

    No worries. She's still up for a promotion.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22763 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Richard Aston,

    What is your predictions on the Judicial recounts ? In your experience do they change the result?

    I don't have experience of this, but I very much doubt there will be a difference. The local returning officer will have been damn careful. Unless the standard for divining voter intent is changed, if there's more than like three votes different, I'll be quite surprised.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3202 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Russell Brown,

    No worries. She’s still up for a promotion.

    Don't be a party pooper, let me have my 'fun'.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3202 posts Report Reply

  • Joe Wylie, in reply to Russell Brown,

    No worries. She's still up for a promotion.

    A good Judas goat is hard to find.

    flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 4591 posts Report Reply

  • Phil Lyth,

    Back. There were 19,874 informal party votes - you could argue 'None of the Above' soundly beat United, and came within 5,000 votes of both Act and Mana.

    53,344 informal candidate votes. In individual electorates, informal candidate votes ranged from 1.5x to well over 5x the informal party votes. Some would have been accidental, most I expect were deliberate.

    Are there more informal candidate votes when a party is not running? We'll see when the split vote reports come out. Graeme, the Electoral Commission expects to have these online next week, "subject to any judicial recounts" they said. (For the election: referendum info in January.)

    From 2008 in Ohariu, 15% of Green voters gave their electorate vote to Dunne, or 527 people. You can't assume all Green votes would have gone to Chauvel.

    Wellington • Since Apr 2009 • 458 posts Report Reply

  • Phil Lyth, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,

    The local returning officer will have been damn careful.

    And the party scrutineers will have good info on exactly how many and which voting papers are in dispute (although thanks to the black sticker system, not whose votes they are.)

    Wellington • Since Apr 2009 • 458 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Russell Brown,

    still up for a promotion

    Vote for stability and continuity, says Key.

    If everyone does the same thing the whole time, I think it has a stale feel to it and I don't want that.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19699 posts Report Reply

  • merc,

    Got to give Key credit for jamming home the differences. Labour is stale, simple. Key never takes his eyes off his competitor, and he gives out clues. Remember he said that Labour totally underestimated him? Remember the debates with Cullen? Remember he was very wary of engaging with Clarke in public?
    Labour lack smarts, and I am too wary to mention the out of date union tactics.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • Phil Lyth,

    Looking at the relative votes for Maori, Mana, ACT, party informal, and United (31k, 24k, 23k, 19k, and 13k), there could be an argument for not only no threshhold, but also for informals to count as 'None of the Above': ie the seat does not get allocated.

    Might be an incentive for more people to turn out.

    Had the above applied for 2011, Conservative would have had 3 seats, Legalise Cannabis 1, and 1 seat would have been unfilled.

    Wellington • Since Apr 2009 • 458 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Phil Lyth,

    for informals to count as 'None of the Above': ie the seat does not get allocated.

    I like that idea for the electorate vote. Automatic byelection in that seat until the parties put up a candidate the locals like enough to vote for.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19699 posts Report Reply

  • Lilith __,

    Graeme: typo at # 2., I think you mean "or" not "of".

    Dunedin • Since Jul 2010 • 3890 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler, in reply to Lilith __,

    typo at # 2., I think you mean “or” not “of”.

    fixed.

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3202 posts Report Reply

  • Richard Aston, in reply to Phil Lyth,

    there could be an argument for not only no threshhold, but also for informals to count as ‘None of the Above’: ie the seat does not get allocated.
    Might be an incentive for more people to turn out.

    I think the idea of a "none of the above" vote is a great one , you could add a threshold to it, say if NOTA ( non of the above) votes exceed 20% of the total vote then the result for that electorate is nullified and they have to try again.

    Northland • Since Nov 2006 • 509 posts Report Reply

  • Greg Dawson, in reply to Joshua Arbury,

    I realise some Green voters hate Labour as much as National/Act/UF. I just wonder whether it’s still not getting through that vote splitting is fine.

    I think you'll see once the split votes stats come through that Green voters tend to be a lot more tactical than Labour voters.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 294 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz, in reply to Greg Dawson,

    As I've said before, there isn't any reason to vote split in most electorates (the usual suspects excepted). That's a benefit of MMP, you can vote for the candidate/party you actually agree with on both the electorate and party vote.

    Ok, if you feel strongly that one or both of the major party candidates should or shouldn't be your electorate MP, then vote for the other one. But in general, it makes no difference.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.