Are the public tuned in?
September 15th, 2011 at 4:00 pm by David FarrarOver at Stuff in my “By the numbers” blog I look at the lack of volatility in the polls currently compared to the previous 12 years. Lots of graphs from a presentation I did this morning.
Tags: By the numbers, Polls, Stuff
September 15th, 2011 at 4:36 pm
Are the public tuned in?
Mostly not from my experience. They would sort of like things to change but don’t want to think about it or do anything about it.
Will this disinterest continue through to the election or will they suddenly get interested in November? The media has kept saying nothing will happen politically while the RWC is on, generally people are quite happy to go with that. We’ll have to see if they react to the media onslaught once they have put the RWC behined them.
Another aspect is the political options are as weak as I can remember. As far as many people are concerned John seems an ok bloke and the rest are best forgotten. Will it result in a very low turnout? Or will something rev up the interest?
Vote:September 15th, 2011 at 4:56 pm
Pete George: It’s interesting that you mention turnout. Here are the numbers from wikipedia.
2008: 79.46%
2005: 80.92%
2002: 76.98%
1999: 84.77%
1996: 88.28%
1993: 85.2%
1990: 85.2%
1987: 89.1%
1984: 93.7%
1981: 91.4%
It looks like it has been generally decreasing, with a dip in 2002. Though apparently it was low in the 70s too.
If I had to guess, I’d say 71.5% in 2011.
DPF: I think National are intentionally trying to keep the election quiet. Labour are not making things interesting either. It’s a big yawn so far.
Vote:September 15th, 2011 at 4:59 pm
The RWC is not a politics free zone. If there is a stuff-up then that can be whipped up against the Government as the recent opening night debacle showed and was cleverly exploited by Goff. The 2002 election was very interesting in that at the last minute the electors did not wish to give Helen Clark an absolute majority. It may be the same thing will happen to Key but he is paying that game very cautiously. Clark made no secret of her desire to govern alone and timed the snap election to cash in. Key is playing a much cleverer game. Clark kept us all guessing in 2002 when the election would be held. Contrived the dissolution of Parliament. The public can spot a phony and voted accordingly.
Vote:September 15th, 2011 at 5:06 pm
Interesting turnout figures tas. 1996 was the first MMP election. 2002 many voters deserted National.
Looking at the general trend down and the expected drop this year due to National playing things very cool and a very weak opposition I think you’re right about the probability of a record low turnout.
Vote:September 15th, 2011 at 5:10 pm
tvb – I think the most interesting outcome will be whether the electorate gives National an absolute majority or not.
Ironically if Labour do manage to score some hits and ensure National are not given a majority it may be small parties that benefit most, unless Labour can somehow also look far more competent at leading rather than bashing.
Vote:September 15th, 2011 at 5:23 pm
An alternative explanation for the volatility/lack thereof:
Vote:In 1996-2008 people were generally disatisfied with both parties, and thus turned from one to the other seeking the least-bad option.
Now, people ARE satisfied (with National at least), so have no reason to be fickle.