Polls December 2013

January 8th, 2014 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

pollsdec13

 

The latest polling update, for November and December 2013. National has had a good three months.

The summary of the newsletter is:

There were three in November and two in December.

The average of the public polls has National 13% ahead of Labour in November (was 10% in October) and also 13% in December. The current seat projection is centre-right 61 seats, centre-left 59.

Tony Abbott has the shortest honeymoon in recent history, with the Coalition already behind Labor and with a net negative approval rating in Australia.

In the United States President Obama’s approval rating is drops to an even further all-time low of 41%. The Republicans are now ahead of the Democrats on the generic House ballot as the Obamacare fiasco damages the President and his party.

In the UK Labour’ leads the Conservatives by just 5%.

In Canada the ongoing scandal in the Senate sees the Conservatives drop to 28%.

The normal two tables are provided comparing the country direction sentiment and head of government approval sentiment for the five countries. The mood in NZ is a net 27% higher than Australia and 69% higher than in the US. Key is the only leader with a positive approval rating (+30%).

We also carry details of polls in New Zealand on cannabis, CIRS, electoral threshold, asset sales, KiwiAssure, Te Tai Tokerau, Pike River, GST, Fireworks, the speed limit, fishing, mining, land sales and drink driving plus the normal business and consumer confidence polls.

This newsletter is normally only available by e-mail.  If you would like to receive future issues, please go to http://listserver.actrix.co.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/polling-newsletter to subscribe yourself.

Tags:

57 Responses to “Polls December 2013”

  1. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Interesting graph. From the beginning of 2012 there is a noticeable levelling off with National being between 45 and 50 percent.
    Labour and Greens have also levelled off.
    It’s looking like it’s the minor parties that are going to be the most interesting to watch, and potentially have the power come election time:
    – Will Winston make the 5% threshold?
    – How many seats will the Maori party win?
    – Will Colin Craig get into parliament?
    – Will ACT and United Future get a seat each?

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Colville (2,272 comments) says:

    Nice to see the impact that Cunners has had on the fortune of the Liarbore Party… a big fat zero.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. duggledog (1,559 comments) says:

    Ha ha yeah Colville exactly. He reminds me of those poor car salesmen who had to try and sell Ladas and Skodas to a disinterested public back in the day.

    National will keep its head down and beaver away, keeping the powder dry until probably mid year. Then Booosh! watch them all come out and lambast the Greens & Labour (same thing to all intents & purposes), and then drop the big lollies. The strategists will have a battle plan all ready to go. Can’t wait

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    ACT is gone, UnitedFuture, aka the lecherous fantasist Dunne, the racist Maori Party and Winston First will be there, although with fewer MPs.

    The Conservatives are a big if that could decide the shape (and colour) of the next government.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    aussies are fucking morons. blaming the new govt for dishing out the medicine required to fix the clusterfuck that was the last labour govt

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Pete George (23,602 comments) says:

    Craig is aiming high:

    “I think on a really good day the best turnout we’d make double digits.

    “Realistically it’s too early to say because we know last year we got a big surge heading up towards election day, I do expect to see the same thing again.”

    http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/auckland/news/128392281-colin-craig-thinks-conservatives-can-reach-double-digits

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. flipper (4,084 comments) says:

    dime (8,005 comments) says:

    January 8th, 2014 at 11:34 am

    aussies are fucking morons
    *****

    Agreed. But they have had it so good for so long.

    If Abbott sticks to his guns the third year will see a big turnaround..

    In the mean-time…their polls are fucking useless.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. duggledog (1,559 comments) says:

    Craig could be right. National basically did a Tony Blair and reached right into the opposition’s territory, which is always going to expose a weak flank on the ‘right’.

    Bob Jones did something similar in that he provided the circuit breaker. But he was a real kiwi bloke that smacked interfering reporters in the head. can’t se CC doing that!

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. bringbackdemocracy (427 comments) says:

    Nice to see the Conservatives increasing their support at this stage in the electoral cycle. They are now averaging 1.9% and rising. At the last election the polls had them averaging 1.3% and they more than doubled that in the party vote.
    It’s a shame you don’t include them on the graph.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Than (475 comments) says:

    duggledog, National don’t really have any choice about keeping its powder dry. They can’t lambast policy until it’s released, and Labour under Cunliffe has actively avoided taking firm positions on anything.

    But once the election campaign starts and Labour (and the Greens, and Mana) have to actually say what they would do in government I agree National will come out all guns blazing. The fact that Labour is likely to shift significantly to the left (the activist base that put Cunliffe in charge are demanding it) and will need the support of two far-left parties to govern should make it easy to convince voters that a Labour-led government would be an economic disaster for NZ.

    Things are looking promising for National governing alone in 2015.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Alan (1,087 comments) says:

    Of course there’s not going to be a lolly scramble mid year, no give away’s from National.

    To do so would erode their case for governing. The mantra will be, “much done, much still to do”, there’ll be no job done statements.

    Tax cuts or a spend up legitimises Labours position and moves the debate to a “what to spend the money on” election rather than “there’s no money to spend, prudence is required” election.

    National can’t win a “what to spend the money on” election. 2005 is proof of that.

    This is basic stuff.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. tvb (4,432 comments) says:

    The big story is the economy and will the public trust the Labour Party. The track record of labour government is to spend to the point of bankruptcy. In Greece socialist Government bankrupted the country. In the west they fall just short of that.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    In Greece socialist Government bankrupted the country.

    You can add Australia, France, Venezuela, Canada, Spain, and the UK to the list.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. duggledog (1,559 comments) says:

    Alan they’re already talking about a potential increase in PPL. You’re right, ‘much done, much more to be done’ but if they don’t promise the lofo’s something, Labour will – and then some.

    Remember this is a country that continues to spend money like there’s no tomorrow. Our private debt is still colossal.

    Than: I agree wholeheartedly although:

    “should make it easy to convince voters that a Labour-led government would be an economic disaster for NZ”

    Yes except in Wairoa, Kawerau, Tokoroa, Kaikohe, Kaitaia, Stokes Valley, Cannons Creek, Shirley… shall I list them all?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Albert_Ross (298 comments) says:

    once the election campaign starts … Labour (and the Greens, and Mana) have to actually say what they would do in government

    – I do hope you are right Than and that the media will make sure of this rather than letting them simply moan about how dreadful everything is and it’s all National’s fault. Sadly there is a ready audience, and a lot of votes, for doing nothing more than that

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Manolo, I agree that ACT are gone. Dunne will probably get his seat. I can see the Maori Party getting two seats at the most.
    (Hone will get his seat of course).
    It really comes down Winston and/or Craig crossing the 5% line.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. bc (1,367 comments) says:

    Regarding the “lolly scramble”:
    I really hope National don’t do it this year. The projected surplus is wafer-thin. Much better to go into an election showing a sensible approach to getting us out of the red.
    Also, it would be much harder for National to criticise Labour for going on vote-buying spending promises if they are doing the same thing!
    As much as tax cuts are great, paying off debt is better in the long-run. Save it for the 2017 election.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Pete Burdon (19 comments) says:

    I think the media skills of Cunliffe will see him take lots of media coverage off the Greens (and take some of their votes in the process). Because Shearer was not good at giving sound bites, Russel Norman became the ‘go to opposition guy’ for the media. This helped the Greens in the polls. But if more media coverage for Cunliffe equates to more votes, he will just take them off the Greens and only change the structure of the ‘left block’, not cut into National’s support.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. In Vino Veritas (139 comments) says:

    I don’t understand “centre left”. Labour are currently far to the left of centre, Greens are even further left of Labour and Hone is as far left as you can be. So who is “centre” of the left that makes up the 59 seats?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. tvb (4,432 comments) says:

    Australia is far from Bankruptcy but Gordon Brown took Britain very close. NZ still had plenty of borrowing capacity at the start of its recession and could slowly bring the books back into order rather than impose austerity. But another spending binge from the Labour Party will mean that austerity will need to be imposed once the money runs out. And the money always runs out when there is a Labour Government. They never ;leave the public accounts in better shape after a spell in Government. They spend the lot as they did spectacularly in Australia. That is the risk of a Labour Government. I hope we NEVER see another one.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Ed Snack (1,883 comments) says:

    Trouble is, the Conservatives really aren’t any such thing. They’re a socially christian economically loony nationalist party, sort of Winston Peters plus a bible. They are trying to attract (it seems to me) the 3-4% of people who will vote “christian” over anything else. They have no real future, all the increase in these polls is showing is that to some degree any publicity be it good, bad, or indifferent, is “good” publicity. Craig might win a solid “blue” seat if National gift him one, and maybe once get an extra MP or two, but that’s it, and nothing more in the future, ever. They have no coherent set of policies, just a grab-bag of populist memes that are mostly well past their use-by date; and they only exist because Craig has money enough to waste.

    Where is the economically “dry” but mostly socially laissez-faire party that ACT once promised to become ?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    ACT is gone for good, I’m afraid. It committed political harakiri by electing John Banks as leader. Banks, an unreformed National Party stooge, presided over the party’s demise.

    It all went downhill when Richard Prebble passed the mantle to Rodney “All Bluster, No Action” Hide.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Alan (1,087 comments) says:

    ACT died because it got too close to and too subservient to National; Hide told people that they should vote ACT to ensure that John Key was PM. People outside of epsom rightly thought, if I want that I can just vote national myself.

    The ACT partys long term aim should have been to take on National in a battle of ideas around the economy, tax and personal freedoms and replace it as a party of government. Much in the same way the Greens are trying to replace Labour on the left.

    When ACT became happy just to be a prop it lost it’s purpose.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. adze (2,126 comments) says:

    ACT died because of a series of dodgy scandals that hurt their principled image (the same risk the Green party faces, but have yet to suffer from), and because they went off message; banging on about the Treaty (Brash) and running out of talent once they gave Hide the boot. Banks was never a good choice, both he and Brash were poisoned chalices for the party.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    Manolo et al. I sure hope you are wrong about ACT’s imminent demise, but I fear you may be right. There are a number of good people who could lead it, but no-one with any parliamentary experience. I guess it would be possible to “learn as you go” for a new ACT leader, but it would be one helluva big ask, and require someone of extraordinary talent.

    I believe Rodney could save the day, but I also believe him when he says he is “over it” and doesn’t want to do it any more.

    As for all the “experts” here talking about ACT failing because it got too close to National…bullshit. I will never forget our first caucus in 2008, when Rodney told us all we were in the “death zone of NZ politics”, one which no small party supporter in government had ever survived. He warned us that day of the dangers of infighting and factionalism, and that is what did for us ultimately. The scandals didn’t help of course, but they were survivable if we had been a tight cohesive unit loyal to the leader.

    If Craig gets in this time – which I think is a strong possibility – it will be very interesting to see if the Conservatives can survive three years which no small party prop to the bigger sister has ever done.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    DG – you personally are the reason why I will not vote for ACT.

    I will not vote for a party whose vetting system was so bad that it allowed someone who stole the identity of a dead infant to become an MP.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 19 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. stigie (1,224 comments) says:

    For fuck sake, get over yourself Gazzmaniac.

    DG has paid the price !!~

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    DG was trying to give some insight as to why ACT failed, and conveniently ignored the major part he had to play.
    I felt it was relevant to point it out.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    God, you are boring Gary…my part in the troubles ACT experienced in 2008-11 is so well known I might as well have pointed out that it is light outside until about 8pm at this time of year.

    As for the supposed failure of the party heirarchy to pick up my offence, YOU conveniently ignore the well known fact that I made full disclosure of it long before I got to parliament…but hey, why let facts get in the way?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    Like I said, their vetting process must have been pretty poor, and it is worse since they let you become an MP knowing that you had stolen a dead baby’s identity.

    You shouldn’t have promoted yourself as a potential MP when you had a dead baby’s skeleton in your closet, however the party is as guilty since they should have known better.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    Are you old enough to have a 27 year old skeleton (30 years this year) in your closet? If so, perhaps you could share it here…you hide behind a pseud, so no-one will know…

    And you really cant have followed the news very well at the time..I never “promoted myself as a potential MP”…they approached me…at which time I told them all about it, and also told them it would inevitably emerge..

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. freedom101 (505 comments) says:

    David, I agree that it would inevitably emerge, which begs the question why it was not disclosed to the public *before* the election that got you into parliament. Instead of becoming a scandal there would have been the opportunity to show contrition and honesty and explain that everyone makes mistakes and you had made amends over the last 25 years and were intent on making a significant contribution. David, can you please explain why it was decided to keep your past a secret, especially since it was inevitably going to leak out? I have struggled to make sense of what happened.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Alan (1,087 comments) says:

    “As for all the “experts” here talking about ACT failing because it got too close to National…bullshit.”

    Whilst I wasn’t an ACT MP, I was a voter so I’ll disagree. I think as a voter my view is just as important. I didn’t give a stuff about the two ladies (the blonde one and the scary looking one, names escape me sorry) fighting with Hide and Sir Rodger bringing in Don. I cared about the fact that the party abandoned the reason it was set up. It’s purpose became propping up National.

    I never heard enough from Rodney Hide telling me that John Key was wrong. I never saw the ACT party engage in a battle of ideas with National. Hide became subservient to Key in public. It was “Yes, Prime Minister, no Prime Minister”. It was all about the “John Key led administration”.

    He should have said, we’re supporting National (shouldn’t have gone beyond confidence and supply, no ministers) because they are the lesser of two evils, the least bad option. When he got inside the tent, he lost the ability or the will to articulate his principles.

    Voters decided that ACT and National were in fact interchangeable, so voted directly for National.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    Are you old enough to have a 27 year old skeleton (30 years this year) in your closet?

    Nope. I’m young enough that you couldn’t steal my identity if I’d died as an infant.

    Given you said that you knew it would inevitably emerge, why did you still run for parliament? You knew its emergence would come at great personal cost to yourself.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    Alan: The reality was we only had 5 MP’s, and a limited amount of “pull” with the Nats. It was, as you correctly note, a confidence and supply agreement, and not a coalition. In the agreement we had a wish list of what we wanted…the top of the list was three strikes, and we got that…all the “experts” at the time said that would never happen; that the Nats had just agreed to support it at first reading as a sop to us, and would never support it further. Well, they did, and they did that because we persuaded them to.

    We got the 2025 task force, led by Don, but were less successful with the recommendations arising from that than with 3S. In fact it rather neatly illustrated the limits of our power We achieved a number of other things which to be quite honest now escape me – I was focused on doing my job, which was to persuade the Nats to support 3S into law.

    You also forget that our influence was diminished by the fact that the Nats also had an agreement with the Maori Party – something Rodney never thought they would do. the bottom line was if we would not support something, they could possibly get the Maori vote by giving them some concession. That significantly limited our power and influence.

    All in all I believe we did a lot more than “prop National up”. We strongly opposed and voted against a number of Treaty Settlement Bills. We pushed for and got an explicit ban on charging for access to beaches over which groups of Maori got some form of title. That was a major win, and one which many didnt realise the significance of at the time. As a result, when did you last hear of some Maori group demanding money for access to “their” beach, something that was happening often prior to 2008.

    Rodney was prepared to resign as Minister of Local Government if the Nats established Maori seats on the Auckland Council. They gave way on that. There is a limit to what you can achieve when you are five, and the big party is 55 or whatever….especially when they have another option in the form of the Maoris.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Alan (1,087 comments) says:

    That’s a good response; I appreciate you taking the time to write it, thanks.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Pete George (23,602 comments) says:

    David’s comment makes it clear what the reality is with a small versus large party – wagging the dog just doesn’t happen in practice. Politics is a numbers games and the biggest numbers usually have the biggest say. You might score the odd win when you have enough numbers to swing a vote inn Parliament but success is mostly proportional to numbers.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. freedom101 (505 comments) says:

    David, how come Alan gets a response, but I don’t? I am genuinely interested in finding out why a decision was made not to clear the decks re your past before you became an MP. This must have been a deliberate decision, and in retrospect not a good one, but what was the reasoning behind not making a public statement before the election?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. ManuT (54 comments) says:

    I have to say to all you wankers who wont let up about David Garrett’s past. Make sure you are totally clean yourself before dragging up other peoples historical mistakes.
    This guy makes a lot of sense whether you are politically aligned or otherwise so LET IT GO

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Shazzadude (529 comments) says:

    bc:

    – Will Winston make the 5% threshold?-yes, Winston is a perfect 6/6 exceeding 5% coming off terms where he was never part of the government (1993-8%, 1996-13%, 2002-10%, 2005-5.7%, 2011-6.5%)
    – How many seats will the Maori party win?-zero to two if a truce deal isn’t made with Mana, otherwise it could be three
    – Will Colin Craig get into parliament?-yes, electorate + coat tails
    – Will ACT and United Future get a seat each?-No. Dunne might hold on but he faces the toughest challenge of his political career, ACT are cooked.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Pete George (23,602 comments) says:

    Two significant differences for Winston this time – he is getting noticeably jaded and is far less sharp than in the pas. And he may be competing with Craig for party votes. Conservatives only have to take a percent or so of common voting ground and NZF will find it very tough.

    Key won’t hand him a cup of tea opportunity. Winston’s health could be a factor too.

    Much may depend on whether the media find another excuse to promote him or not but even if they do it will be tough for an aging and waning Winston.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    David Garrett was totally maligned by the filthy left, along with supporting socialist scribes at Fairfax, APN, Tv, and NewstalkZB. There was once again a concerted effort by these scum to ruin the career of a decent hardworking polly (not many of them left). He would have run rings around any of these losers who still jump on any bandwagon to try and belittle the man. They have gone quiet on Lecher Len, Cunliffe’s false Cv, Goff’s breach of confidentiality, etc, etc. These parasites in media need sorting out really quick!

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. bringbackdemocracy (427 comments) says:

    The tide is going out for Winston. He will lose support from both sides, the Conservatives and a resurgent Labour. His caucus has been a non-event ( there are only 7 and 2 are from Christchurch, they were MIA during the by-election). His age and health are becoming factors as well as his inability to maintain a team around him.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    There was once again a concerted effort by these scum to ruin the career of a decent hardworking polly

    You could use that phrase to describe what happened to Len Brown also. Scum occur on both sides of politics.

    As others have stated previously, if DG had publicly disclosed the skeleton in his closet before running then we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    gazz: Len Brown is a non-productive lecher who has degraded his position and that of the City . . . big difference.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    I would say the same about DG. I voted for ACT for their economic policies, and held my nose and tolerated the sentencing BS. All we got from ACT was three strikes (which will cause the death of a cop from someone trying to flee on his third strike) and the super city (which hasn’t reduced costs as promised, and has made the local council even less concerned about what is good for the citizens).
    So while you think that DG was an asset to the country, I see him as the man who destroyed the only classic liberal party in parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. freedom101 (505 comments) says:

    David, as someone who put a lot of work into ACT over an extended period of time, I think we are owed an explanation as to why a decision was made to withhold information about your past conviction. As you say, it was inevitable that it would become public. It simply makes no sense. If you won’t provide any information on this point then the conclusion has to a FUBAR of monumental proportions, where to identify the decision makers and to explain their reasoning remains too embarrassing to divulge even several years later.

    IGM is right that the left destroyed you and ACT, but wrong in blaming them for that. You cannot blame a dog for eating offal. It’s what they do. What did you expect the left to do when they found out? Sit on the story and feel empathy for you?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. freethinker (691 comments) says:

    The danger for National is Christchurch were Waimakariri will certainly return to Labour with many previous East Christchurch Labour residents moving to Kaiapoi and Christchurch Central will go Red again. But the party vote is more problematic in that many will be anti National due to their poor handling of quake issues and failure to do anything practical in breaking the insurance logjam which could persuade some to party vote elsewhere – Conservatives perhaps?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    freedom: Fair enough…You have to remember I was very green when I got selected…my only political involvement had been as a Labour door knocker in 1984, more than 20 years earlier. All I will say in answer to your question “why did I run knowing the skeleton would come out?” is that others made the decision to say nothing about it, and I reluctantly went with their judgment. The thinking was even if it did come out, no-one would care very much since it was something that had happened 27 years earlier. I recall when the shit hit the fan, Roger at first had forgotten my disclosure – although when reminded of the meeting where I made it he remembered – because in his view it was of no significance. The “wiser heads” above me proved to be 100% wrong.

    As for “you cant blame a dog for eating offal”, I dont accept that analogy. If you can be bothered, go back and take a look at the media frenzy around me, and compare it to the minimal attention Darren Hughes got a month or so later. No big surprise though, when you learn that Hughes was MC at Guyon Espiner’s wedding – the very guy who broke the story on me.
    The bastards camped outside my house for several days; Hughes was staying at Paul Henry’s beach house, which can hardly have been difficult to find. None of them went near their left wing mate who made such amusing speeches…

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    David: I overlooked that Hughes affair; seems that is how the left-wing media manipulate the populace. As has been stated, it is high time these bias, unionised messengers of the left were brought in to heel. King still has some explaining to do over that Hughes affair, also the 14-year-old boy plied with booze and interfered with at a Labour social gathering in Parliament. Come on media let’s have some explanations? Yeh right!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. ChardonnayGuy (1,207 comments) says:

    As for Australia, has anyone polled what would happen if the Liberals came to their senses, gave Abbott the boot and replaced him with Malcolm Turnbull? Who, I note, seems to be walking with a spring in his step and gleam in his eye. More to the point, if this continues, how long will it be before there’s an Ides of March scenario and Abbott splutters ‘Et Tu, Malcolm?’ before lurching into political oblivion? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    Hard men like Russel Red decry me for resigining…I could see that the bastards would never let up, and I had a son who was only five at the time…when I tucked him in at my sister’s place (where we had gone to avoid them here) and he said “Dad, are the media going to come in the night?” I knew I had no choice…the poor little bugger wasn’t responsible for some tomfoolery I had engaged in 27 years earlier…

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. freedom101 (505 comments) says:

    David, the left wing media is a feature of our political landscape. They were always going to get you/ACT given the slightest opportunity. The ‘wiser heads’ were not very wise were they? Amazing stuff up.

    Fortunately help is on the way. The erosion of newspaper and network television audiences will eventually free us from this tyranny. The right will read Kiwiblog, the left will read The Standard and we will get the weather and road toll off Stuff or NZ Herald!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. David Garrett (7,318 comments) says:

    freedom: Re your last para, I think you are right…I only buy the Herald now if I am waiting to meet someone and need something to read (I am a very impatient man)…

    The end came for me when they ran a front page lead last year or perhaps the year before… a little girl who had swallowed a $2 coin…front page story, complete with x-ray showing the coin….earlier editors of New Zealand’s onetime journal of record must be turning in their graves….

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Graeme Edgeler (3,289 comments) says:

    The right will read Kiwiblog, the left will read The Standard and we will get the weather and road toll off Stuff or NZ Herald!

    Not sure that will work, freedom101.

    This post, for example, is based on polls conducted for the Herald on Sunday, and the Herald.

    And with the exception the general debates, and this post based on Herald and HoS polls, the 12 most recent stories on Kiwiblog begin:

    The Press editorial:
    The Dom Post editorial:
    Stuff reports:
    The Press editorial:
    Stuff reports:
    An interesting article in the Dom Post
    The Herald reports:
    The Press reports:
    CNBC reports:
    David Shearer writes at Stuff:
    The Dom Post reports:
    News.com.au reports:

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. gazzmaniac (2,307 comments) says:

    As for Australia, has anyone polled what would happen if the Liberals came to their senses, gave Abbott the boot and replaced him with Malcolm Turnbull?

    It won’t happen. One thing that the Liberals campaigned heavily on was Labor changing horses mid-race. They would be branded hypocrites if they did it themselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. ChardonnayGuy (1,207 comments) says:

    On the hand, the federal power at all costs strategy didn’t particularly work well for the Liberals. The cost of John Howard’s eleven years in power was that his logical successor Tim Costello got tired of waiting, and the Coalition ended up losing power across almost all of Australia’s states and territories, as well as foundering around and going through a string of leaders until Tony Abbott had the luck of the draw when it came to state ALP government incumbency fatigue and the Rudd/Gillard factional civil war within the ALP. Had the latter not happened, Turnbull would have launched a counter-coup ages ago. As it is, I think it’ll be only a matter of time before entropy catches up with the Liberals and they succumb to the inevitable.

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