The latest Roy Morgan poll

November 25th, 2011 at 9:14 am by David Farrar

Roy Morgan released a poll overnight, which some may have missed. I’ve blogged details at Curiablog.

One aspect of the poll makes me a bit doubtful of its salience – those who say the country is heading in the right direction dropped 11% from last week. That is a huge drop for one week, and suggests to me the sample may be over-represeted with “grumpies”. But we will see tomorrow.

What is interesting is the seat projections on their poll:

If all parties hold their current seats, it is:

  • National 60
  • Labour 29
  • Green 18
  • ACT 2
  • Maori 4
  • United Future 1
  • Mana 1
  • NZ First 8
  • Total 123

If Banks does not win Epsom and Dunne does not win Ohairu, it is:

  • National 62
  • Labour 30
  • Green 18
  • Maori 4
  • Mana 1
  • NZ First 8
  • Total 123

In this scenario National just has to drop one further seat and it can not form Government, as the Maori Party holds the balance of power.

Phil Goff could almost form Government on 23.5% of the vote if he does deals with Greens, NZ First, Maori and Mana parties.

It would be a good result for Phil Goff as he keeps his job. Not so good for his colleagues though as on this poll, Labour would lose 13 MPs, but get to form Government.

Tags: ,

58 Responses to “The latest Roy Morgan poll”

  1. Scott Chris (5,677 comments) says:

    DPF, curious to know what you make of ACT’s prospects in light of this recent poll:

    >>”A poll in today’s National Business Review of 500 voters puts support for Mr Goldsmith on 46 per cent, ahead of Mr Banks on 37 per cent. Labour’s David Parker was on 12 per cent, and the Greens’ David Hay on 3.3 per cent.”

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10768576

    Will history repeat with a last minute swing? And what is the reason for these last minute Epsom swings, or is this phenomenon a blip, not a trend?

    [DPF: Worth recalling that no public poll ever has shown ACT winning Epsom but they have won it twice]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Fletch (5,720 comments) says:

    Phil Goff could almost form Government on 23.5% of the vote if he does deals with Greens, NZ First, Maori and Mana parties.

    That’s one of the main problems with MMP. How can 23.5% be seen as anything like a mandate from the people.
    Ridiculous.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    Maybe the Epsom voters are just plain pissed off with beign told who they are goignt o vote for. They’ve had a decade and a half of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. swan (651 comments) says:

    Scott Chris – Its called doing your duty. Lots of them dont particularly want to do it, dont like to think about, and like to pretend they wont – right up to the point they do. I for one have faith in the good people of the Northern Slopes!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. swan (651 comments) says:

    Fletch – 23.5% isnt a mandate. 50.01% is. Thats the point.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    Phil Goff could almost form Government on 23.5% of the vote if monkeys fly out of his ass and become his front bench with assistance from the alien space lizards.

    Also a possibility.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    Did you really use the word “duty” in New Zealand swan? I’m pretty sure thats not legal here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Chuck Bird (4,406 comments) says:

    [DPF: Worth recalling that no public poll ever has shown ACT winning Epsom but they have won it twice]

    The difference this time is that Labour and the Greens are are actively encouraging their voters to vote for a National candidate. Typical hypocritical behaviour of the left.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. anonymouse (651 comments) says:

    Not so good for his colleagues though as on this poll, Labour would lose 13 MPs,

    They also loose a fair swag of Cabinet posts which will get horse traded away in the support deals, -

    Pretty much stuffs up Labour’s ability to up skill any future high-fliers
    (Although with 13 fewer MPs, I am not sure they get any new MPs except for Andrew Little)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Bed Rater (239 comments) says:

    I wouldn’t like Labour et al to be able to form government. But it’s stupid to argue that if Labour forms government with the rest of the left leaning parties, because they form the majority of the house, then it’s a failing of MMP.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. burt (7,085 comments) says:

    It would be a good result for Phil Goff as he keeps his job.

    And being a Labour MP that is his first and only priority !

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. travellerev (149 comments) says:

    I have done my utmost best to bring to the citizens of this beautiful country the ugly truth about international Finance and John Key’s very, very close connection to it and while I wish I had reached more people I know I have reached thousands of new readers over the last couple of weeks and that I find very encouraging as some of them came of Kiwiblog without leaving large amounts of trolling comments and many of them came by way of other National dominated Websites were I left links to posts on my blog. I think people are waking up. I only hope it will be enough of you in time!

    Tomorrow you the good citizens of this country are going to vote and I think this is one of the most crucial elections this country has ever seen. This is not an election about which party is going to rule New Zealand the coming three years but an election which could very well end the sovereignty of New Zealand in favour of a banking cartel ruled global occupation which will see the last great Global looting commence as is happening in Greece, Italy and will continue to engulf Spain, France and in the end every sovereign country in the Western world.

    I hope you use your vote wisely!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    I hope all the leftie trolls just foad on Sunday myself.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Lindsay Addie (1,105 comments) says:

    The NZ Herald on their home webpage has a poll running asking which party are you voting for.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Scott Chris (5,677 comments) says:

    swan says:- “Its called doing your duty.”

    Good point. You might be right.

    Chuck Bird says:- “The difference this time is that Labour and the Greens are are actively encouraging their voters to vote for a National candidate. Typical hypocritical behaviour of the left.”

    They are simply playing the game by the established rules. ie – voting tactically. Perfectly acceptable for the left to vote for Goldsmith according to the established voting culture in Epsom.

    Murray says:- “I hope all the leftie trolls just foad on Sunday myself.”

    ~wow. how insightful.~ Idiot troll.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. backster (2,000 comments) says:

    In order for the Labour comglomalition to form a government they may have to cede the Prime Ministership to the Greens.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. toad (3,654 comments) says:

    If I lived in Epsom I would be voting for Goldsmith. I don’t think it is unprincipled or hypocritical at all.

    One of the most important things to me that can achieved at this election is to rid politics for once and for all of the bigoted and venal scourge that is the ACT Party. For Epsom voters who want to achieve that, the best way of doing so is to vote for Goldsmith.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Keeping Stock (9,788 comments) says:

    @ Lindsay; and with over 6300 “votes” cast, National is on 57%, Labour on 19% and NZ First on 6%

    I could almost tolerate Peters getting back in if Labour gets decimated like that :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. KiwiGreg (3,129 comments) says:

    Oddly enough toad I feel much the same way about the Green party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Lindsay Addie (1,105 comments) says:

    IV2

    We can only hope…….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    “If I lived in Epsom I would be voting for Goldsmith. I don’t think it is unprincipled or hypocritical at all.”

    Of course you don’t, you beling to the party that makes sign vandalism make D day look like an anual church picnic in terms of organisation.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Razorlight (43 comments) says:

    Look at the comments over at the Standard. The lefties are all leaving Labour and the Greens in droves and getting in behind Winston. If that sentiment is replicated in the general left electorate ,Labour’s vote is going to collapse tomorrow and Winston is going to drive right through the middle.

    Until today I thought there was no chance he was going to be back but after reading the comments over there, I now think he will be in.

    Not that it will change the result though. His support is coming from the left. Righties are rejecting him.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Grizz (476 comments) says:

    The Nazi Party became the German Government with just on 30% of the German vote in a proportional representation system and they then proceeded to take over. The rest is History

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. lastmanstanding (1,154 comments) says:

    Reason 7856 why MMP is a crock of shit. Anyone who thinks a party with almost 50% of the popular vote should be Her Majestys Loyal Opposition has rocks for brains.

    Remember you frigging LEFTIES.. It could happen to you in the future And you would rightly screaming blue murder.

    Talk about mass disenfranchisement

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. swan (651 comments) says:

    toad,

    That would be unfortunate. With the Greens reaching for the centre, and hiding their communist baggage away from sight, ACT is now the only principled party in parliament. And by that I mean a party that serves a set of principles, as opposed to a party that cares about only one thing – Votes.

    I didnt realise bigoted and venal were synonyms for truth-seeking and rational thought. But there you go, you learn something new every day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. lastmanstanding (1,154 comments) says:

    And the dumb arse citizens of Epsom will awaken on Sunday and wonder why they have a Labour/Green/NZ1/Mana government with Wuseel as Min of Fin Winston Min of Foreign Affairs and Hone Min of Maori Affairs.

    they will choke on their lattes in Mt Eden etc.

    Dumb arses all of you.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    lastmanstanding,

    Since when did democracy mean “rule by the party with almost 50% of the vote”?

    Whatever party can get a majority of the members of Parliament to support its government on confidence and supply deserves to govern. Whether that majority is achieved with one party or a coalition of parties is irrelevant.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    swan,


    ACT is now the only principled party in parliament. And by that I mean a party that serves a set of principles, as opposed to a party that cares about only one thing – Votes.

    ACT used to be that type of party. Not so sure anymore with Banks. If they do remain in Parliament I’d probably prefer they get 2 seats rather than 1 so Don can provide some balance to Banks.

    Also it seems unfair to discount the Greens as a party of principle. They are very idealistic.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. emmess (1,333 comments) says:

    Reason 7856 why MMP is a crock of shit. Anyone who thinks a party with almost 50% of the popular vote should be Her Majestys Loyal Opposition has rocks for brains.

    Even worse this scenario outlined in the Herald where National get more than 50% and still fails to govern

    Today’s poll also throws up a bizarre possible outcome – National winning more than 50 per cent of the party vote but still needing Act, the Maori Party or United Future to give it a majority in Parliament.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10768571

    Somebody, please explain how that is remotely democratic.
    How is that not as bad as the 1978 and 1981 elections, if not worse?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. swan (651 comments) says:

    Weihana,

    Agreed Banks is not the best look for ACT. I dont know why Don hasnt been campaigning harder for the North Shore.

    The Greens have totally sold out. Their activist base basically doesnt believe in a market economy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Manolo (12,624 comments) says:

    And the dumb arse citizens of Epsom will awaken on Sunday..

    To secure victory why hasn’t Labour lite been more direct and openly endorsed the ACT candidate in Epsom?
    Even more so, if you consider Banks is a National Party stooge, a Trojan horse, not a liberal in economic matters.

    National is riddled with hangers on, media minders, wimps and spin doctors who have proven themselves useless in the last weeks of the campaign.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    Manolo,

    Would an explicit endorsement really have changed anything? Perhaps it would just turn some people off who don’t want to be told how to vote. In hindsight I think Key probably shouldn’t have said anything because the whole issue seems to have galvanized the left to try and secure a victory for Goldsmith.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. EverlastingFire (290 comments) says:

    It would seem the outcome could indeed result in a heavy left influence from all corners of its extremes. This would undoubtedly and thoroughly destroy the country. With any luck, the stoners and bludgers will stay at home on election day.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. KiwiGreg (3,129 comments) says:

    Actually I feel about this election much as I did about the RWC final. It ended up being closer than it needed to be because National has foot faulted. They should never have run a candidate in Epsom, that would have guaranteed Act getting back. as it is I am now going to have to sit through a much closer game then I should have to. Hopefully the same good result and general happiness tomorrow night though :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    emmess (944) Says:
    November 25th, 2011 at 10:34 am


    Even worse this scenario outlined in the Herald where National get more than 50% and still fails to govern

    Somebody, please explain how that is remotely democratic.
    How is that not as bad as the 1978 and 1981 elections, if not worse?

    Keep in mind that this would be a consequence of electorate seats and the overhang.

    I don’t see how such a result could be seen as worse than 1981 but perhaps it could be seen as similar to 1978. 7.4% of the vote in 78 and 16.1% of the vote in 81 translated into 0 and 1 seats for social credit respectively. In 1978 National governed with less than 50% of the popular vote and in 1981 National governed with only 39.8% of the vote behind Labour with 40.4% of the vote.

    The problem with the current system is 1. The Maori seats which encourage strategic voting and 2. The 5% threshold. Remove both and the system will be fairer IMHO. Will never be perfect though.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    “This would undoubtedly and thoroughly destroy the country”

    The sky is falling, the sky is falling!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    I detect a lot of uneasiness in National supporters. This will guarantee a high turnout of their supporters meaning they are pretty sure to win.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. David Garrett (5,120 comments) says:

    That comment about the sky is falling is ironic coming from the adolescent supporter of the Greens (do I have both of those right Weihana?)

    When they speak in the House, the Green MP’s all predict ALL the time that the sky is falling next Thursday unless this or that perfectly sensible measure – often totally unconnected with the environment – is voted down…..or else….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. lastmanstanding (1,154 comments) says:

    Weihana

    So you reckon its OK that almost 50% of the citizens dont have their views counted and acted upon.

    cause thats what you are saying.

    And remember it could as I said bite the LEFT on the bum in the future.

    Its a crock of shit designed for the rag tag fringe element of our society NOT the majority of good citizens

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. RWood (18 comments) says:

    Amusing to watch all the Nat/Act types soiling themselves over the prospect of a centre-left coalition. It’s not going to happen. The bumbling of Key and his minders will scare fringe Nat supporters and some swinging voters into voting National, given the above threat. That’s fortunate for Labour actually, because anything they could cobble together would only last a few months before another election would be forced, with severe punishment from the electorate to follow. Labour will be far better off in opposition, watching National’s popularity dwindle during the next term – which will be a very difficult one for any government.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. lastmanstanding (1,154 comments) says:

    Weihana

    Yes we will be getting our supporters to the polls and then afterwards for a gentel cup of tea.

    Unlike Mike the Bike in 2005 we WONT be busing them to KFC BEFORE they get to the polls.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    David Garett,

    I will not be voting Green tomorrow. Never have, probably never will.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. EverlastingFire (290 comments) says:

    “centre-left coalition”

    Lol, centre? Let me guess, you think National is a right-wing party don’t you?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    “I detect a lot of uneasiness in National supporters.”

    I detect a massive deal of underpants wetting from the left myself. But apprently these “detections” are not election results, so there you go.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    lastmanstanding (637) Says:
    November 25th, 2011 at 11:16 am

    You’re not making much sense. Almost 50% does not equal a majority of “good citizens” unless of course “good citizens” is defined as a subset of those who are entitled to vote.

    Democracy is 50.1% deciding who governs. If it is unfair for National on, say, 49% to not govern, why is it not unfair for the other parties to be in opposition if they have a combined share of the vote in the same region?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    Murray,

    The left has been anticipating defeat for a long time. The potential closeness of this election would not likely make them uneasy, it has probably made them excited.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    I didn’t say what their pants were wet with did I.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. David Garrett (5,120 comments) says:

    Weihana: One out of two aint bad….let me have another go…one of those young women yelling from the comfort of the crowd at Backbenches?? One of those who had to leave suddenly just as the show was ending?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    “Democracy is 50.1% deciding who governs. If it is unfair for National on, say, 49% to not govern, why is it not unfair for the other parties to be in opposition if they have a combined share of the vote in the same region?”

    Because it’s not representative of anything except divisiveness.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    David Garrett,

    I’m not a woman. :)

    Another bit of trivia for you, my first ever vote was cast for the ACT party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Weihana (4,475 comments) says:

    Murray,


    “Because it’s not representative of anything except divisiveness.”

    The term “coalition” implies the very opposite of divisiveness. In any case I don’t really see the fact of people voting for seperate parties means they deserve to be disenfranchised of their democratic rights.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    The term might imply whatever it likes, but the “bottom line” of these parties shows anything but unity doesn’t it.

    the only commonality amongst them is a desire for power.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. swan (651 comments) says:

    Murray,

    I would suggest they have a lot in common:

    Disregard for basic economic principles
    Support for wealth redistribution
    Support for regulation/control of individuals behaviour
    Xenophopia
    Nationalism

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Scott Chris (5,677 comments) says:

    So Garrett resorts to inferring that Weihana is a wet behind the ears idealist to undermine his credibility. As if Garrett’s got a credible leg to stand on. lol.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Murray (8,835 comments) says:

    So shooting the messanger is off the menu of the left this week failscott?

    Check your own legs, they seem to lack crebibilty too.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Scott Chris (5,677 comments) says:

    Just tailgating the tailgaters murray. Like you. If you don’t like being tailgated, then don’t tailgate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. JamesS (352 comments) says:

    Weihana does not lie in Court (and then lie about the lying), does not make staff members feel uncomfortable and does not put the Mother of a certain dead baby through unimaginable hell – and according to some has no credibility.

    Interesting logic some people have credibilitywise.

    I for one always enjoy reading posts on Kiwiblog by Weihana – even if I do not agree with a single word, and feel a very long period of silence from ‘some people’ would be most welcome.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. David Garrett (5,120 comments) says:

    Weihana: I stand corrected, and humbly take everything back….

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.