The problems for Labour if they don’t get their party vote up

June 24th, 2014 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

I blogged yesterday on ’s list, showing who comes in at what party vote percentage. Looking at that table, it shows why needs to significantly lift their party vote.

I’ve tweaked the table to use the iPredict seat predictions, as assumptions. This means:

  • If Labour got only 23%, their only List MP would be Deputy Leader David Parker
  • At 23%, only 34% of the caucus would be female
  • They need 26% to retain Andrew Little
  • They need 28% to get Kelvin Davis in. If they are polling below that, then Labour can’t sacrifice him to help Kim DotCom’s party get into Parliament
  • They need 29% to get any Asian MPs
  • They need 30% to get even a single new List MP
  • They need 34% to make their gender target of 45% female

They also have challenges in terms of having a caucus that can excite people to vote for it. The highest ranked new candidate is a policy analyst for the Ministry of Women’s Affairs. I’m sure she is a very capable and talented person for her to have been ranked so high, but Chris Trotter would point out that having your highest ranked new candidate being a policy analyst, won’t really appeal to Waitakere Man.

I touched yesterday that out of a projected caucus of 34 (on average of all public polls), they would have eight Maori MPs, five Pasifika MPs and no Asian MPs. Dong Liu will want his donations back :-)

Also of interest was that five Labour MPs pulled out of , including Trevor Mallard. Trevor said that he wanted to help Kelvin Davis out, but that is a nonsense statement. Unless Trevor loses Hutt South to Chris Bishop, then whether or not Mallard is on the Labour List will have no impact on whether Kelvin Davis gets in. So either Trevor thinks he may lose to Bishop, or he withdrew from the list for a different reason to what he stated.

Tags: , ,

38 Responses to “The problems for Labour if they don’t get their party vote up”

  1. EAD (1,129 comments) says:

    If Labour get their party vote up then we will have shoved down our throats – spying on our citizens, Political Correctness, Massive Borrowing, expansion of Welfare, Multiculturalism, Islamisation, Globalisation, Socialism and our Liberties being destroyed one by one.

    VOTE NATIONAL so they don’t get their party vote up and we will get spying on our citizens, Political Correctness, Massive Borrowing, expansion of Welfare, Multiculturalism, Islamisation, Globalisation, Socialism and our Liberties being destroyed one by one……. but at a slightly slower pace and with a “trustworthy” bloke doing it.

    Tough choice – what team should I choose?

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. EAD (1,129 comments) says:

    PS: I am male, majority British (75%) by ancestry and to look at me first glance you’d say a “whitey”.

    Do I give a fcuk if a Woman, Maori, Pakeha, Homosexual, straight, Asian or a disabled represents me in the law making corridors of power? No I don’t. I don’t care who their parents were, who they shag in their spare time or if they once had an accident which means they have to use a wheelchair.

    Just let me enjoy my life as I see fit as long as I do no harm unto others. Ensure the rule of law and free speech is upheld and you won’t hear anymore from me.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. metcalph (1,430 comments) says:

    but Chris Trotter would point out that having your highest ranked new candidate being a policy analyst, won’t really appeal to Waitakere Man.

    Chris Trotter doesn’t strike me as much of an authority on anything. His latest article about what Cunliffe should do repeats a hoary urban legend and gets two facts wrong – the poll in question was for the 1936 presidential election, not Truman in 1948, and relied on a write-in magazine survey as opposed to telephone polling.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. backster (2,174 comments) says:

    I think Trev pulled out from being on the list to save face.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. freedom101 (505 comments) says:

    I agree that Mallard’s reason for coming off the list is complete nonsense. My guess is that he was going to be offered a list position which would have offended his pride. He’s got a good pension, is bored with the whole thing, knows he’s in for more years of opposition, and can’t bear the thought of having to negotiate everything with the caucus, unions, party hierarchy and the Greens. In short, the future is bleak. I don’t see him doing much door knocking in Hutt South!

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. OneTrack (3,116 comments) says:

    ” won’t really appeal to Waitakere Man.”

    It’s pretty clear that Labour 2014 absolutely don’t care about Waitakare Man. Whenever Trotter brings it up, they apparently laugh at him. Possibly they have never met one in real life, so they think it is a mythical creature.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. gravedodger (1,566 comments) says:

    The entire five pulled out to avoid having to promote the party and its embarrassing leader while they go full on to survive.

    That was always their only hope as members of the significant ABC grouping in caucus.

    Will Mr C get where Phil didn’t, to an image on the signage or will options remain open?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. TMC (75 comments) says:

    Hypothetically speaking, suppose Waitakere man in the New Lynn electorate wakes up to the fact he is represented by a smug charlatan from Herne Bay with a memory problem and votes for someone else.

    What would happen if Labour got <21%?

    Would Cunliffe not even get in?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. hj (7,033 comments) says:

    Labour The Wind-bag Choir.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. mister nui (1,029 comments) says:

    It’s pretty clear that Labour 2014 absolutely don’t care about Waitakare Man.

    They also don’t care about the Islander vote either.

    I know a number of Islanders who were staunch Labour, they have now positively switched sides. National should be campaigning in South Auckland for more of these voters. It will be an easy hunting ground.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Elaycee (4,393 comments) says:

    Trevor said that he wanted to help Kelvin Davis out….

    Sheesh – I thought Labour genuinely wanted to win the seat! But maybe not….

    If Mallard is really wanting to help Davis, he should stay as far away from Te Tai Tokerau, as possible.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. mister nui (1,029 comments) says:

    Can someone enlighten me to what this stupid word “pasifika” is?

    I assume it is a word dreamed up by our wet liberal media, as for some reason, they believe the word Islander is racist.

    FFS, stop using the stupid word, it does not appear in either of the Collins or Oxford dictionaries, so why the fuck is it being used.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Syd-Kiwi (344 comments) says:

    The above conclusions depend on the PV of Labour. If Labour only get say 27% of the vote, Labour may lose Napier and Davis takes Nash’s ‘seat’.

    It is interesting that the mainstream media has not called Mallard out on that logical fallacy.

    Also worth noting tthat the NBR and Claire Trevett at the NZ Herald both got the % to seats figures quite wrong.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11280161

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. tvb (4,431 comments) says:

    Mallard’s statement about helping Kelvin Davis are either hogwash or he does not understand seat allocations under MMP. Mallard should have retired from politics if he really wanted to help Kelvin Davis.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. chris (647 comments) says:

    Hypothetically speaking, suppose Waitakere man in the New Lynn electorate wakes up to the fact he is represented by a smug charlatan from Herne Bay with a memory problem and votes for someone else.

    Interestingly, in the last few elections in New Lynn the Labour candidate polls way higher than the others, but a heap of them split their vote giving the Nats and Greens (among others) higher PV than candidate vote. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Lynn_(New_Zealand_electorate)

    If National can get out and really push hard in New Lynn, it wouldn’t be impossible to unseat Cunliffe. They’d have to have a huge collapse in party vote across the country for him to not be saved by the list though.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. spanish_tudor (81 comments) says:

    Not wanting to defend Mallard, but I read somewhere that he stood aside from the list-ranking process so as not to be another male ranked above Davis, given that every straight, white male on the list needs to ‘compensated for’ by a handful of list members from the various interest groups/minorities.

    So if Mallard was ranked at 18 (or even lower), there’d have to be a clutch of other wimmin/members of the gaggle/non-Europeans/self-serving unionists before Davis would get a look in…

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. G152 (350 comments) says:

    A buggers muddle whether voted for or not

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. s.russell (1,642 comments) says:

    I posted yesterday that it would be valuable to know what the “paper majority”positions are in some of the crucial electorates following boundary changes.
    I have tracked down an analysis on http://www.tallyroom.com.au that reports (with my translation from % to # of votes):
    Maungakiekie – paper majority for National of 1914
    Waimakariri – paper majority for National of 1087
    Christchurch Central – paper majority for National of 364
    Port Hills – paper majority for National of 826
    iPredict has Labour winning the last three of these with probabilities of up to 80% (which seems a little high to me!)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Keeping Stock (10,342 comments) says:

    DPF blogged:

    The highest ranked new candidate is a policy analyst for the Ministry of Women’s Affairs. I’m sure she is a very capable and talented person for her to have been ranked so high…

    Perhaps Mrs Radhakrishnan drew on her experience as a policy analyst at the Ministry of Women’s Affairs to draft Labour’s Man-Ban policy :D

    In any event, I hope she no longer works as a policy analyst at the Ministry of Women’s Affairs now that she is officially a Labour Party candidate, given that the public service is supposed to be politically neutral.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    The Waitakere man will flock back to labour once GR is leader. Honest.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    KS
    There are explicit rules around public servants standing for Parliament. They have to take leave from Nomination Day, I think. No requirement to resign.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Steve Wrathall (284 comments) says:

    By the looks on their faces, their new list candidates realise this predicament
    https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152137031367466&set=a.10150173316927466.299538.696207465&type=1&theater

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Sean (301 comments) says:

    @ misternui

    I don’t care who created it but ‘pasifika’ is clearly a New Zealand word, so I for one embrace it. I don’t give a kea’s droppings if it isn’t it some UK dictionary.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Fisiani (1,040 comments) says:

    It’s all about the Party Vote. Labour and the Greens think that people look carefully at the lists and nod in approval at their manbans.
    The truth is that most people just want a strong stable trustworthy government and will thus PARTY VOTE NATIONAL.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Only if you shout at them though.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. alwyn (427 comments) says:

    metcalph @ 11.26am

    Sorry, but Chris Trotter’s description of the 1948 election is accurate.

    Truman in 1948 simply refused to give up whereas Dewey almost stopped campaigning, being totally convinced he would win.
    So were the papers and there was almost no polling done in the last month or so. After all, they believed, Dewey was sure to win so why waste the money.

    There was a famous poll in 1936 predicting that Landon would beat Roosevelt but that wasn’t what Chris is talking about.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. metcalph (1,430 comments) says:

    Sorry, but Chris Trotter’s description of the 1948 election is accurate.

    Wrong. His actual words:

    Only after the election did the pollsters realize their sampling methodology was connecting them exclusively to Americans wealthy enough to own a telephone. Overwhelmingly they have been questioning Republican voters.

    That’s the 1936 election story and it is wrong in that the Liberty magazine survey used self-reporting questionnaires, not telephone polling. The 1948 election polls were not overwhelmingly questioning Republican voters. They showed that Truman was consistently behind and only in the final poll before the election (at the end of October) did Gallup actually put Truman within the margin of error.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Mark (1,488 comments) says:

    Labour are facing an election defeat of the magnitude that National experienced under Bill English. In 2002 National polled just a fraction under 21% and based on recent polls and the shambles of the Liu donation you have to expect that Labour will be hovering around the 20% mark in the next polling. The difficulty for Labour is that Cunliffe is unlikely to stop the slide. Parker may well become a casualty if the Cunliffe effect keeps eroding Labour’s vote

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. dime (9,980 comments) says:

    any chance Jacinda could miss out? cause that would make me LOL

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. tedbear (146 comments) says:

    Who would even want to retain Waste of Space Andrew Little?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Fisiani (1,040 comments) says:

    A Party Vote for Labour means that you want David Cunliffe as Prime Minister, Russel Norman as Finance Minister Winston Peters as Revenue Minister and Hone Harawira as Education Minister.
    A Party Vote for National means that you want John Key as Prime Minister and Bill English as Finance Minister.
    Now do you understand why Party Vote Labour is down to just habitual voting without actually engaging brain.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Dom Knots (155 comments) says:

    1948 – very significant. The same year of israels systematic and murderous ethnic cleansing of Palestine.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. gravedodger (1,566 comments) says:

    @ Steve Wrathell 1 40, Great link, is Mr C doing an impression of leading with your chin but forgot to bring it.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Syd-Kiwi (344 comments) says:

    Ardern will not lose her (list) seat. In 2002, National with 21% still managed 6 list MPs (notably, Hekia Parata was the 7th and narrowly missed out).

    Safe: Even at around 25%, Labour would still return Parker, Ardern, Cosgrove, Moroney, Little and Street at a minimum as List MPs.

    Unsafe: These are a number of existing Labour MPs under threat (whether on the list of fighting for a seat) at around 25*%, in order of most in danger:

    1) Beaumont – Gone
    2) Huo – Gone
    3)Lees-Galloway – Gone unless he holds PN.
    4) Davis – gone unless he knocks over Hone.

    5) Dyson – gone unless she holds Port Hills with favourable boundary changes to her National opponent. This is a tough one to pick since Dyson has a strong electorate record, and National have a new candidate.
    6) O’Connor – must hold WCT.
    7) If Labour holds/wins Port Hills, Chch Central & WCT, Mackey is also gone as the next list casualty.

    Street could be gone if Labour do extremely well in winning most or all of the contestable seats (unlikely with a Labour Party vote of 25%). That is why she is in the safe bracket.

    A worst case scenario of say 25% Labour will also utterly fail to refresh under this scenario, with Nash, Milne, Coffey, Rachel Jones and Radhakrishnan all likely to fail to be elected.

    Under the 25% scenario, Sepuloni would be the sole ‘fresh’ MP (though she has, like Nash, already been in Parliament) with half a dozen current MPs out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Elaycee (4,393 comments) says:

    Dom Knots’ efforts bear a striking similarity to the crap once spouted here by Hamas supporter Luc Hansen.

    Perhaps they are one and the same – Luc was a complete moron, too.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Dom Knots (155 comments) says:

    lol one down tick right off the bat. i love this shit

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Steve (North Shore) (4,565 comments) says:

    The rainbows have got Trev by the gonads, and Trev is embarrassed to admit it.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. OneTrack (3,116 comments) says:

    fisani – “A Party Vote for Labour means that you want David Cunliffe as Prime Minister, Russel Norman as Finance Minister Winston Peters as Revenue Minister and Hone Harawira as Education Minister.”

    Ohh, how sexist. In order to live up to their goals of gender and racial diversity and equality, Labour and the Greens, will want to include Metria Turei, Annette King and Laila Harre as co-Finance Ministers, and sharing the Prime Ministership – one week on, one week off, as per standard union rules.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote