Conservatives

December 1st, 2011 at 12:32 pm by David Farrar

MPs in

None

Result

5.0/10.

The Conservatives did not get into Parliament but they attracted over 55,000 votes gaining 2.8% of the vote. This exceeded expectations for a first time party with no current MPs, and wasn’t included in any of the debates. Obviously it helped that their leader, Colin Craig, could fund their campaign, rumoured to cost $1 million.

Craig came second in Rodney but only attracted 22%, miles behind Mark Mitchell who got 53%.

The Conservative tag line was “Every vote counts” which is especially ironic as none of their 55,000 votes counted. It is unknown how many people only voted for them because they believed Colin Craig would win Rodney, and hence their votes would count. I debunked the Rodney poll they pushed out, in this post.

Challenges

A major challenge for them in 2014, will be to convince people that a vote for them won’t be a wasted vote. No one in their right mind will ever again believe a poll commissioned by the Conservatives purporting to show them ahead, unless the methodology and questions are fully revealed.

A related challenge will be how to maintain momentum over three years. Not being in Parliament makes it very hard to gain publicity.

There is definitely room in the political spectrum for a conservative party. IF NZ First had failed to make it back, they could have picked up a significant portion of their vote. It is hard to see how the Conservatives can make 5% in 2014, especially with the fear of wasted vote.

Hence there is much logic to exploring a merger with John Banks. Banks seat of Epsom means they would gain seats, even if they get less than 5%. Banks has the profile and the seat, while Craig has the money and the activist base. But I am unsure that Colin Craig would accept any sort of shared leadership.

Tags:

27 Responses to “Conservatives”

  1. V (584) Says:

    ACT policies are not equal to the Conservatives, so I don’t see that happening.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Monique Watson (1,048) Says:

    Stating the obvious but they need to challenge an electorate in 2014. Tauranga?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. XChequer (350) Says:

    Perhaps, rather than latch on to another party, with all its inherent implications and expectations, ACT should forget about any merger (which would seem to be expediency – not policy) and just concentrate on building a credible brand again.

    If I was Craig, why should I let “Stumpy” Banks stand on my shoulders.

    Errr, metaphorically, that is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Rick Rowling (649) Says:

    It’s okay, by 2014 MMP will be fixed so that there’ll be a PV vote transfer if you vote for someone who doesn’t make the threshold, and it won’t be wasted votes.

    /if only.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Lucia Maria (1,392) Says:

    It would most likely kill the Conservatives if they joined with ACT and John Banks. None of their voters would be particularly happy about that and would probably not vote for them again.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Johnboy (11,276) Says:

    If MMP is revised and the threshold lowered to say 2.5% they would have three seats with 2.8%.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Ed Snack (979) Says:

    To repeat, ACT and the conservatives are a very poor fit. The conservatives are a far closer fit with NZ First, Colin should work on that angle, Winston has to retire at some point. However the issue of sharing power with Winston…it ain’t going to happen, while he’s alive.

    I’d say that there’s room for a socially conservative party quite distinct from the economically liberal one, and the conservatives are not economically liberal in general. They’re a sort of “Colin First” without the miasma of corruption that hangs over NZF.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. XChequer (350) Says:

    I agree Lucia.

    Why bother. Better to build on a firm foundation, build a party base and go forward from there. If CG can see it through, I predict the Conservatives could be a force – providing, of course, they actually manage to post some policy instead of broadly stated aims such as these http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/policies.php

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Lucia Maria (1,392) Says:

    Johnboy,

    I’ve been wondering if a lowering of the threshold is on the cards, that’s why it’s important to kill off the Conservatives now.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. The Silent Majority (79) Says:

    Colin Craig would be mad to go anywhere near ACT and he knows it. Not only due to the very obvious Policy differences but Colin would be wise to only become involved with people who are competent. Banks however, is another matter altogether, competent AND conservative.
    Do you know for sure he’d want a leadership position within the Conservatives? He could well be happy to just be the MP for Epsom.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Johnboy (11,276) Says:

    Surely you are not suggesting that the Blue team lead by their able spinmeister are trying to abort the Conservatives at birth Lucia? :)

    Don’t they need a new playmate for the 2014 innings?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. JamesS (352) Says:

    I always thought that poll in Rodney seemed a bit dodgy.

    Seems that not all christian fundamentalists believe in telling the truth.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. nasska (6,685) Says:

    …”Seems that not all christian fundamentalists believe in telling the truth.”…..

    As long as it advances the cause anything is permitted.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Lucia Maria (1,392) Says:

    Johnboy,

    If it looks like a duck …

    JamesS and Nasska,

    Or their polling methodology was stuffed. Maybe they should be hiring DPF next time around.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. wreck1080 (2,924) Says:

    Shouldn’t they be called the religous party?

    This is like the communists calling themselves the greens.

    A wolf in sheeps clothing. Not that there is anything wolfish about god-botherers, they are merely annoying .

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. GJ (327) Says:

    Wreck 1080: I always thought the Greens were Communists in disguise!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Lucia Maria (1,392) Says:

    Wreck,

    Only if their purpose was to make everyone religious.

    There are many religious people in both National and Labour and no one calls them a religious party, even though Phil Goff even said that Labour party policy was Christian.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Johnboy (11,276) Says:

    Lucia: I would think it would be to Nationals advantage to have a more extreme party on their right of whatever conviction to capture the farther right vote leaving National to concentrate on the centre right and stop a re-born Labour Party from getting them back.

    As ACT seems stuffed the Conservatives would be the obvious choice. Why destroy them?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. David Garrett (3,957) Says:

    What is the evidence to support the idea that Conservative is a “Christian party”? I see none….and having met him a couple of times, if Craig is a fundy nut he disguises that fact very well…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Jeremy Harris (323) Says:

    I think this is just plain old Nat spin from DPF. 2.8% from a first outing when the party only formed 3 months ago is outstanding.

    Many, many people voted for them knowing their vote wasn’t going to count.

    Where will they pick up another 2.2%? Well quite obviously from National, a large chunk of soft Nat voters (farmers especially) live socially conservative family lives, oppose the ridiculous ETS and smacking bill, support one law for all and are looking for a party with the principles the Nats used to have.

    The Conservative are the 4th largest party by members and 5th largest by votes, there is no reason that won’t continue to grow.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Pete George (17,909) Says:

    What is the evidence to support the idea that Conservative is a “Christian party”?

    That’s an interesting question. Itr’s not promoted as a “Christian party” but there are obvious connections with the Christian lobby.

    While Craig says that the Conservative Party does not intend to “legislate morality”, he is a Christian and does not personally support homosexuality or common-law marriages.

    “I do believe in a creator God and hold to traditional christian beliefs (although am not affiliated to any particular church). ”

    Party policies are fairly closely aligned with Christian principles. The party rated 87% compatible with Famiklie First ideals.
    The Kiwi Party and Larry Baldock have merged into the Conservative PArry, Baldock being 3 on the list.

    The (Kiwi) party advocates more direct democracy through referenda and a return to the “Judeo-Christian ethic in democracy”.

    The demise of the Family Party and New Zealand Pacific Party in 2010 left the Kiwi Party as the only conservative Christian-based political party within New Zealand politics.[citation needed] This was changed by the arrival of Colin Craig’s Conservative Party of New Zealand in August 2011.

    On 14 October 2011 the Kiwi Party announced that it would not be standing any candidates in the election, and that several members had joined the Conservative Party and would be standing for it. Party leader Baldock was number 3 on the Conservative Party list and stood again in Tauranga. Deputy leader Dyer was number 7 on the list and stood in East Coast Bays. Party president Copeland stood in Hutt South. No candidate was successful.

    Other members also stood for the Conservatives on their party list.

    So while the Conservative Party may not be a ‘Christian party’ it seems to have significant Christian influences and connections.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Johnboy (11,276) Says:

    “While Craig says that the Conservative Party does not intend to “legislate morality”, he is a Christian and does not personally support homosexuality or common-law marriages.”

    With beliefs like that Pete he could attract a few Islamic folks to his party. Now that would be lots of fun.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. wreck1080 (2,924) Says:

    I just had the belief the Conservative party was strong on religion.

    I don’t recall how I formed that opinion but it was probably something i read in the news .

    Maybe there were some in the media trying to portray them so.

    I might take a second look at them for the next election.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Aredhel777 (237) Says:

    I think your take on this is exceedingly negative. The Conservatives did very well to pick up 2.8% of the vote as a first time party. If Winston retires and New Zealand First dies or merges with them they would have a decent chance of getting into power next election. They would be mad to have anything to do with Act or even John Banks who has stupidly tainted himself with their vile rightwing policies for the rest of his life.

    “As long as it advances the cause anything is permitted.”

    No, that’s the Marxists, not the Christians. You know, the people who tortured and murdered tens of millions of Christians in the twentieth century.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Nick K (586) Says:

    Colin Craig would be mad to go anywhere near ACT and he knows it. Not only due to the very obvious Policy differences but Colin would be wise to only become involved with people who are competent. Banks however, is another matter altogether, competent AND conservative.

    Act had some terribly incompetent people during the election campaign, that thankfully were gotten rid off during the campaign, but after the damage had been done.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. s.russell (1,337) Says:

    Iv’e got to say that it seems a bit ridiculous to be predicting now how popular CG’s party will be in Nov 2014.
    But I predict this: a deal with Act would be a suicide pill. The public does NOT like these grubby deals. Besides, the threshold rule will probably be changed by then anyway.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. The Scorned (602) Says:

    They would be mad to have anything to do with Act or even John Banks who has stupidly tainted himself with their vile rightwing policies for the rest of his life.

    Just what were these “vile right wing polices” ACT are supposed to have had…? Freedom?…choice? …individual liberty and rights protected and respected? prosperity via hard work in a free market?

    The bastards! :-o

    No, that’s the Marxists, not the Christians. You know, the people who tortured and murdered tens of millions of Christians in the twentieth century.

    While Marxist’s and other authoritarians did indeed murder hundreds of millions in the 20th century, the vast majority of those were NOT Christians…who themselves murdered many millions themselves over the last 2000 odd years…

    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.