2011 General Election Results Analysis

December 12th, 2011 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

Since 1996 I’ve done an analysis of the election results after each general election. They have a number of aspects to them. The 2011 analysis is embedded below for those interested. It is 46 pages long. It includes:

  1. Overall results for NZ for each party and for each “bloc”.
  2. The change from 2008 to 2011 for each party and bloc.
  3. Results for each party and bloc by region and area.
  4. The change from 2008 to 2011 for each party and bloc by region and area.
  5. National’s Party Vote, Party Vote %, Electorate Vote, Electorate Vote %, Party Vote Change, Party Vote Relative Change, Electorate Vote Change, Electorate Vote Relative Change, and Electorate Vote compared to Party Vote – for each electorate from best to worst.
  6. Electorate Margins (from Nat point of view) and Electorate Majorities for all electorates.
  7. Labour’s Party Vote %, Electorate Vote %, Electorate Vote compared to Party Vote, Electorate Vote compared to Party Vote for Lab & Greens, Party Vote Change, Electorate Vote Change.
  8. Greens’ Party Vote % and Party Vote Change
  9. NZ First Party Vote % and Party Vote Change
  10. Conservative Party Vote %
  11. Maori Party Vote % and Party Vote Change
  12. Mana Party Vote %
  13. ACT Party Vote % and Party Vote Change
  14. United Party Vote % and Party Vote Change
  15. Right, Centre and Left Blocs Party Vote % and Party Vote Change
  16. Right vs Left Vote % and Party Vote Change
  17. Total Number of Voters per electorate
  18. Party Placings for Party and Electorate Vote

I usually update it once the E9 is published with further statistics such as Turnout percentage for each electorate.

What most struck me in compiling the results is the huge change in party vote in Christchurch. National’s vote went up 7.3% there and Labour’s dropped a massive 10.3%. This is much larger than the +2.4% National went up nationally and the 6.5% Labour dropped nationally. It is a huge endorsement of the work done by the Government, especially Gerry Brownlee. Labour MPs spent months complaining about various issues, setting others up to complain, and even came out with a super-bribe of offering affected home owners more. The fact their vote dropped 10.3% in Christchurch should lead them to reconsider their tactics if there is a future situation like this.

Christchurch used to be called “The People’s Republic of Christchurch” but in 2011 it voted more strongly for National than Auckland did. There is a reason for that.

2011 Final Election Results

Tags:

13 Responses to “2011 General Election Results Analysis”

  1. iMP (2,352 comments) says:

    The massive Party Vote swing to National in Chch must be put down to quake issues; Electorate Votes are a mixed bag and interesting to note Nats got punished (EV) in upper South Is. and West Coast where earthquake was not an issue.

    Nicky Wagner’s vote in Chch central was actually down on 2008, but the PV stayed same as 2008, while Brendon Burns’ vote collapsed by 2500 which i would think can be put down to missing Labour voters and booths in labour heartland. Amy Adams result is out of proportion to all other Nats in region; remembering she was the ‘face’ of the first quake with her home badly affected. Empathy is a powerful politik.

    Electorate Party Vote Nat PV Change 2008-11
    Nat Lab
    Selwyn 23086 5942 +2945
    Waimakariri 20489 8431 +1950
    Wigram 14357 9866 +1049
    Chch East 13252 9100 +963
    Port Hills 14532 9199 +716
    Nelson 16,016 9639 +638
    Kaikoura 18909 6775 +430
    Ilam 19934 6552 +393
    WC Tasman 15462 9200 +275
    Chch Central 12507 8241 +98

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Danyl Mclauchlan (1,066 comments) says:

    Christchurch used to be called “The People’s Republic of Christchurch” but in 2011 it voted more strongly for National than Auckland did. There is a reason for that.

    Voter turnout in those electorates was 14-15% lower than last time, and the majority of displaced non-voters were poorer, thus Labour leaning?

    [DPF: I await to see the final turnout stats, and the key will be the relative drop in Chch compared to other seats. I doubt it explains the voting. Also recall people displaced can still vote in Chch, and also arguably those better off are more mobile and able to leave]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Auberon (873 comments) says:

    It couldn’t be in part that Labour MPs carried on like a pack of stupid pork chops for a year and the puclic found that pretty distasteful, Danyl? Maybe a bit of both?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. wreck1080 (3,865 comments) says:

    If anything, the Christchurch result is an interesting by-product of the earthquake.

    Had the earthquake not occurred, I doubt national would have won.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Pete George (23,427 comments) says:

    I wouldn’t just put it down to the quake in Christchurch.

    Dunedin (North and South combined):
    – National from 31.8% (2008) to 36.3% +4.5
    – Labour from 45.4% (2008) to 34.2% -11.2
    – Greens from 11.6% (2008) to 18.0% +6.4

    Turnout dropped in Dunedin too.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Pete George (23,427 comments) says:

    Dunedin North turnout down 9.18%
    Dunedin South turnout down 4.4%

    Labour have a significant South Island/provincial problem.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Shazzadude (526 comments) says:

    I noted an error in your list of majorities-you have Mangere ranked according to their 2008 majority, not their 2011 majority.

    Fascinating reading though, I can’t wait to look into it further.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Richard29 (377 comments) says:

    Green result in Te Tai Tonga is fascinating – it’s their strongest party vote of any Maori electorate (1000+ votes higher than most of the other Maori electorates) and instead of playing their usual role as spoiler in the two horse electoral race between National and Labour they played the role of spoiler fourth party in the three horse race between Maori, Mana, Green.

    Dora Langsbury got almost double the electorate vote of the Mana Party candidate and the margin by which Rino Tirikatene beat Rahui Katene was significantly less than the votes that the she won. It is probably not unfair to say that if the Greens had not stood a candidate the Maori party would have retained a fourth seat and Nats/Act/united would have 61 out of 122 seats and be unable to govern alone (requiring a coalition with Maori party and possible loss of the asset sales programme).

    Proof again if it was needed that the right has once again schooled the left in tactical voting.
    _______________________________________________

    Te Tai Tonga Results:

    Party Vote:
    Labour Party 6,791
    Green Party 2,789
    Māori Party 2,379
    Mana 1,043

    Electorate Vote:
    TIRIKATENE, Rino LAB 6,786
    KĀTENE, Rāhui MAOR 5,311
    LANGSBURY, Dora Roimata GP 2,546
    DEARLOVE, Clinton MANA 1,360

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. stuarts-burgers (101 comments) says:

    David I think there is a mis-interpretation on page 11. Is not Christchurch Central at 51 on the list the lowest National Candidate Polling seat that National won and not East Coast at 41

    If I am right it tops off a great weekend with getting Nicky into the House as the local MP and then showing DPF were he is wrong with his Stats.

    Yea I am a One eyed Christchurch Central ( not Canterbury, go the might North Harbour) National Party Activist.

    On another note DPF I saw your comment in the thread about Mojo and how you like the actress who played Joey Lucas, maybe it is your desire for a Joey Lucas type role that colours your view.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. mickysavage (786 comments) says:

    I agree with Pete George (gulp). The Dunedin result was even worse. The Auckland result was pretty good for Labour, South Auckland swung heavily and out west Paula Bennett was the biggest scalp of the election.

    No doubt there will be major analysis of the result. Obviously Labour has to do better if it wants to win. But National’s 1 seat buffer is a heartbeat away from ending.

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

    One thing I find really weird about the results is in Rongotai (my electorate); in Seatoun, Seatoun Bays and Miramar National won a massive victory in the party vote (so much so that had I not known better just from talking to local folk in Seatoun and Miramar in the couple of weeks leading up to election day I may have thought we would actually win the seat)

    Despite the crushing victory in this part of the electorate the overall party vote for National appears, at face value, to be pretty piss poor – 58th/70 in terms of votes and only 33%.

    So where exactly did all these Labour votes come from?? and how has Rongotai become an electorate of two halves seperated by the airport?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. dave (987 comments) says:

    good stuff. but the last line on page 45 is incorrect

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. homepaddock (435 comments) says:

    Compulsory reading for political tragics.

    The Canterbury/Christchurch results are a vote of confidence in the government’s handling of the earthquakes and recovery; and in Gerry Brownlee who is the minister responsible.

    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.