Tauranga Poll Results
August 10th, 2008 at 7:12 pm by David FarrarFor those who missed the poll on One News, I have the results on curiablog.
Obviously the great news is that Simon Bridges is 20% ahead of Winston Peters. Peters is facing a crushing from someone born around the time Peters was first elected to Parliament.
What I also found also of interest is the party vote results with NZ First at only 6%. Last election they got over 13% so this is a loss of over half their support.
August 10th, 2008 at 7:14 pm
Oh dear how sad, never mind……
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 7:28 pm
It would be a massacre if the polls hold true.
Clarkson’s 2005 majority of 730 over Peters would stretch to around 7000 under Bridges.
Even if Labour withdraws Pankhurst to assist Winston, it would be likely that Bridges would win by 1800 odd votes, assuming ALL Labour voters switched to Peters.
Peters’ only hope is the 5% threshold. Tauranga has moved on.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Go new hot guy, go!
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Thats a good poll as other 500 people in the Tauranga area would be more accurate than the national polls that are done.
Bye bye Winston.
If he can only get 6% in the stronghold NZF is in real trouble.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
I’ve just blogged almost exactly what you said SR – Tauranga is Winston First’s flagship electorate, and it appears that even there, the party vote has collapsed. On this result, I would guess that NZ First will struggle to get 3% nationwide, and we ALL know what that means!
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Hmmm… looks like the stars have aligned nicely for Winston First… for once his (perceived) political value and (perceived) market value are in sync
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Winnie had it all…and Winnie blew it!
The little slimeball will not be able to blame anyone else for his problems, he has been responsible for his own demise. He has trashed any illusion of credibility that he ever had – his transparent corruption will be his sole political legacy.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
DPF:
Any particular reason why my comment (with only 2 links) is in moderation? Only asking so – hopefully – I (and others) can avoid this issue in future
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:21 pm
You chaps are forgetting one of the biggest stories of the last six months that Winnie knows how to tap into.
Until recently there would have been a large sector of our retired community who thought that Winston was and is a lying slime ball, it would not have mattered what he said or did he could not have counted on their votes.
That was until finance companies started falling over like flies, a lot of these elderly people would have been fairly well off and had their life savings invested in these various financial institutions.
Given that they now face living life on the pension only their votes are back up for grabs, make no mistake, Winston know this and no doubt he will come out with an election pledge to raise the pension by $40 or $50 per week.
The sad truth is that the closer we get to the election the more his support among the elderly will grow, their support may well be enough to see him over the 5 % threshold.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
But what the Bauble taking prick will do, is go around all the old folk homes promising no beatings, free bus rides and free movie tickets and sadly…. Mr Baubles will return to haunt us for 3 more fucking years!!! (but deliver nothing of worth).
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
Big Bruv all the oldies need to be reminded is that Winnie has supported Labour who when the finance companies starting collapsing did nothing about it and are still sitting on their arses instead of introducing laws to protect everyone from these rouges.
I suppose its hard to introduce laws to stop fraudsters when half the Govt could be trapped under the legislation.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
National should hold its own on the senior vote with Key’s promises to improve on superannuation over time.
But it is true that a number of older, mostly Pakeha voters will be feeling vulnerable about finance companies, but I doubt they will somehow be lured by Winston promising extra money to fix the problem when its clear that Winston has financial integrity issues too.
By the way, where’s Ghostwhowalks? Doesn’t he hold a torch for Winston and ought to be here to tell us that the polls are false and everyone will see through sharkey’s lies yada yada yada.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
“I’ve got half a mind to vote for Winston”
Apparently half a mind is a prerequisite for considering voting for Winston
Why does Hey ho the witch is dead, the wicked witch is dead come to mind
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
big bruv, michaels and Southern Raider are all correct. There needs to be an unemotive (so he can’t play the “they’re all picking on me” card) campaign to remind elderly voters – who respond well to factual non-emotive approaches – just what NZF has done, and not done, for them and the country. And a nice highlighted sidebar on Ron “Mr Morality” Mark, just to really get the point across.
What a pity any such campaign would breach the EFA, which… surprise, surprise… NZF supported. But if ever there was a wholly justified and moral reason to break the law, this is surely it. If I had the dollars I’d fund it. If someone else has, and I can do anything to help, let me know. I’d gladly share a cell with anyone who put an end to this travesty.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
Sushi
They will not give a toss about Winston’s integrity, they will vote for who ever promises to give them more money each week.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Big Bruv – I have my doubts. I think senior voters threatened by a loss in the value of their nest egg due to fiscal crookery will be inherently suspicious of voting for someone who looks more and more like a political Petrecivic.
Key and Clark will be able to make far stronger, and more credible pitches to look after seniors.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Sushi, Rex and co.
One thing we should not overlook is that this particular group of elderly people are somewhat greedy, they could have put their money into the bank and got a return of around 8% and been perfectly safe, instead they chased the extra 2%-3% on offer from the rouges.
Vote:Winston will play on their greed and their insecurities, remember unlike the rest of us most of the elderly cannot go out and find work to supplement their pension, the promise of an extra $40-$50 might just be enough.
August 10th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
GREEDY? They took the best offer out there, and trusted the experts with their money. Bear Sterns went under, maybe all those greedy sods should be withdrawing money out of their banks and putting it in government bonds?
Go Tauranga though, keep it up.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Those greedy wrinklies will vote for Winston.
Vote:Then they will complain that all of their beloved grandchildren are overseas.
Could somebody please explain to the oldies that it is Winston’s policies that are driving young skilled people offshore.
August 10th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
Big Bruv,
We can chant “Caveat Emptor” and simply say that the collapse of a company is a very real risk for investors. We ought to be skeptical of anyone who offered “First rank gold plated five star unsecured debentures” at a premium to what was already a high rate of return by trading banks. Greed is a little harsh because this wasn’t the avarice of the 1980s where people were looking for extraordinary high returns on speculative investments (gambling!) but on large finance houses that had proven funding track records.
But in many cases, investors relied on the information put out by the companies that they were solid, “could weather any storm” and were issuing prospectuses that failed to disclose the significant risks that the companies had (such as Bridgecorp or Hanover with their inter-company loans).
Back to Winston – I concede that some seniors might be tempted to vote for Winston if he promised a significant jump in super, but it “feels” more likely that the phone is now off the hook.
Peter Dunne would be more credible in offering a big jump in super, or perhaps some kind of IRD determination that allows finance company investors to write off their losses in an advantageous way.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
DPF, You forgot to mention that the party vote for Labour is almost exactly the same as in 2005. Interesting that.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 9:39 pm
What is being overlooked is the new party on the block with a candidate with huge creditability in the Tauranga electorate previous Councillor and Parliamentarian (2003) Larry Baldock Leader of The Kiwi Party.
Vote:Also one of their policies is a minimum wage of $15 subsidised by the government. Raising the minimum wage raises the the average wage giving superannuitants an increase.
August 10th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
REX!!!!
Vote:I don’t think Sir Bob knows how to use a computer, so he probably won’t be reading this….
I’d give him a quiet call, one would think he’d be good for a 100K.
August 10th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
Whizzer, you are partly right.
The non-entity soon to be forgotten Kiwi Party and its entirely forgettable leader Larry Baldrick have been overlooked.
This is not out of any conspiracy, but because they simply haven’t registered significantly in this poll, or for that matter, any other poll.
Larry Baldrick may have what you call “creditability”, but he lacks a more important political virtue, being that of credibility.
His and their policies are therefore of no interest to anyone except the no-hopers who have climbed aboard that abortive enterprise.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Sushi – I agree completely. Baldork does not even make it out of the blocks. He can put forward ideas about what he might like to happen in Govt, but chances that he would be anywhere near a position to make that happen would require divine intervention….
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Sushi…. Baldrick did pull out of Tauranga last election basically handing it to Bob.
Vote:However, I met him in Hamilton a few months ago and I was impressed with him, in saying that, he wont be getting my vote either.
August 10th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Pity that the NZ First party vote was not 1.1% less – ie 4.9%.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Peterwn – why on earth would it matter? 6% is disastrous for NZF in Tauranga. They need double digits there if they want to break through 5% nationwide.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Larry Baldock couldn’t even get himself elected to Regional Council last year, he came in about fifth.
There is no way he will be elected in Tauranga.
I’m picking he will be beaten into fifth by ACT’s Ron Scott, a popular local body politician in Tauranga.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Vinick,
that’s a convenient “selection” of facts. Let’s see what you missed out on:
1. Larry was five votes short of being elected, with around 14,000 votes.
2. Larry ran NO campaign for the Regional elections: that means no billboards, no flyers, no public speeches, no ads in the newspapers or radio.
Electing a first term backbench junior National candidate with deliver nothing to Tauranga when compared to what a party leader can do from another party altogether. Bradford wasn’t even a party leader and look what she delivered…anarchy.
Bear in mind the Kiwi Party has given a guarantee that they will refuse to work with the Labour Party in any coalition negotiations after the General Election, so a vote for the Kiwi Party is a vote for a change in governement [to a National-led one]. National voters, regardless of how far in front they party is in the polls, need mor eviable coalition partners if they want to be more then just a one term Governement. While I don’t support the current set of corrupt thieves on the 9th floor, one thing they have been more successful at is having a variety of coalition choices. National has to have more than Act as a guaranteed partner if it is to achieve a longer term of Government.
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
Do not discont what big bruv (1281) has contributed , what is the betting that the Peters’ party campaigns upon and makes it a condition upon (if they are in the position of “kingmaker), “all the foolish investors get their capital back courtesy of the taxpayer?”
Vote:August 10th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
So Sushi, if we follow your logic that the Kiwi Party haven’t registered in any poll, then I can draw two conclusions:
1. The NZ Herald are an irrelevant newspaper when it comes to their polls because they mention the Kiwi Party. They must be some, soon-to-be fogotten daily rag that is “of no interest to anyone except the no-hopers who have climbed aboard that abortive enterprise”.
2. (Dis)United(what’s left of)Future and the Progressive’s are equally irrelevant given they register LESS than the Kiwi party in most recent polls.
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 12:04 am
jafapete “DPF, You forgot to mention that the party vote for Labour is almost exactly the same as in 2005. Interesting that.”
Yes very interesting that NZ1′s support has collapsed and Labour has not managed to pick up any of it. They have seen something better and it aint coloured red.
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 7:10 am
Matthew,
You haven’t followed my logic at all.
1. Please show me a single NZ Herald poll that shows the Kiwi Party likely to break through 5% in the PV, or winning Tauranga. You won’t find one, because there aren’t any.
2. United and Progressive both have the luxury of a long held seat. That gives them relevancy. Were there to be a poll that showed them potentially losing their respective seats, they’d be less relevant.
The Kiwi Party is a joke and will not be in the next parliament, or indeed, in any parliament. Larry Baldrick could be one vote short of being elected, and he’d still be a loser. And what’s more, if he wasn’t prepared to run a campaign for his election for regional councillor, why the hell should that inspire me to believe he could win a parliamentary seat. He only ever became an MP because he coasted in on the skills (dubious as they were) of Peter Dunne.
I suggest you give up your false idol worshipping in Tauranga, and prostrate yourself before the Mighty Bridges.
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 7:54 am
No wonder Key was not making any comment about possible hookups with Winnie post election.
No point even discussing it is there.
This must be a little troublesome for Hulun and Mikhael.
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 8:11 am
I think extrapolating the Tauranga result to a national percentage for Winston 1st is probably dangerous. Given how closely “the great survivor” is associated with that electorate, there’s probably an additional factor of people feeling like their own repuations have been sullied by his behaviour.
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 10:06 am
Southern Raider, would you email me at chuckbird@hotmai.com please.
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Look, the Nats should WIPE WINNIE OUT this time around by flogging their “increase NZ Super” policy hard out and taking all the elderly supporters off him…….
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 11:49 am
Rakaia George
A 500 sample size poll in a single electorate is like a national poll of 5,000 and therefore it has a smaller than normal MOE than most single electorate polls. A lead of this magnitude is extremely difficult to overcome. You need some seismic local or national issue to break Winston’s way for a lead like this to be reversed. Winston has played his race, immigration and senior citizens cards pretty much to the hilt and there is little significant political mileage left in these issues. Even if he were to barnstorm the country with some wild new scheme to suck in the silver tops, it might shift him a few percentage points. But any such attempt will be more than offset by the steady drip of bad publicity he will face over the next few months. He is already facing the Privileges Committee hearing, then there is the possibility of a SFO Inquiry as well as a likely Auditor-General’s inquiry and all of these will keep the Owen Glenn, Spencer Trust, Bob Jones donations stuff in the public domain all the way through to the election reminding us what a hypocritical prat he is. Do not underestimate Bob Jones – he helped bring down Rob Muldoon and he’s not a man to cross. He would happily use some of his fortune (even running the risk of an EFA prosecution) to bring down Winston.
I think if I were a betting man, my money would be all on there being no NZF MPs in the next Parliament.
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 11:59 am
I think Peters has so pissed off the press and media that they will give him a rough & negative ride in the election campaign which will almost certainly sink the Witanic – permanently.
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
The Nats now need to cast him off completely HE IS DAMAGED GOODS,
Leave him to Helungrad, she would appreciate having him as albatross around her ugly neck in fact it may improve her looks!!
They need to start promoting the fact that :
“A VOTE FOR WINSTON FIRST IS A VOTE FOR LABOUR”
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
…(but maybe National too)
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Polemic……………I agree with you.
Vote:August 11th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
KiA, as you note a “seismic” issue might be required to overcome this deficite for Winston…I was just advancing the possibility that this corruption issue has already been a seismic negative in Tauranga (because of the fact that voters there know they are linked oin the rest of the country’s mind with Peters) and that it may not have had the same impact elsewhere.
In saying that though, I bloody hope it has (but chickens and eggs…).
Vote: