Election Result Predictions

[Saladin]

Wonder how long it'll be before we go the Australian route, with party reps outside the polling booths, handing out cards that say "heres how to vote if you're a labour/national supporter" Thankfully our system isn't quite that complicated yet

[Sgt Seb]

driving to uni today, saw maurice williamson (national mp for pakuranga) standing out on the road with some of his young teenage boy (???) lackeys waving at passing cars.

gg maurice!

[DMZ Funnel Web]

Another good read from IP http://insolentprick.blogspot.com/


Oh, what a difference a day makes.

On Tuesday night, I visualised Tony Ryall going through one of those minor anxiety attacks, when he sees his entire political career flashing before his eyes, and a glimpse of that stunning future in an alternate public life that was never going to be. But for a few words.

Except, I thought, it wasn’t Tony Ryall’s career that he was imagining were in tatters, but Bob Clarkson’s. Clarkson himself might have had that dramatic epiphany, except he was too stupid to conceive it.

But political epiphanies do not always eventuate. The sudden doom and gloom that strikes a career MP, when he is suddenly under siege and cracks—does not always end in calamity. Often, if they’re lucky—or stupid—the lack of awareness around one’s own actions and the potential to lasso one’s own star with a short string of silly syllables—has little effect. It’s part of that baffling charm of politics. Logical questions, such as: “How did this fucker ever rise this far beyond his level of competence?” fly out the window.

Logic suggests that such ghastly figures as Jill Pettis, Jenny Bloxham, Judith Tizard, and Judy Keall should never be lifted over the bar. Yet they do. And they stay. And they continue to ridicule themselves without any understanding of the mockery they make of the noble art of politics.



Bob Clarkson, of course, may learn quickly that when allegations of sexual harassment are being hurled at him, it is unwise to play with his balls in front of a journalist. Then again, he may also learn that there is a point in this game when the shit just doesn’t stick, and the voters don’t care. The more preposterous the claims against him, the more the locals back him. After all, few in Tauranga would suggest that Vivienne d’Or is the most likely target of sexual harassment—and if the allegations are true, then at most, Clarkson could be described as having very poor taste.

In the main, the voters are tolerant of the “rough diamonds”, as Don Brash aptly described Clarkson. This electoral baptism of fire should have taught Clarkson when to shut his mouth. Perhaps not. Time will tell.

Conversely, one guy who tried to keep everyone’s mouth shut, and another who never can keep his mouth shut—Michael Cullen and Trevor Mallard—have all but destroyed Labour’s chances of winning this election. The student loans fiasco is the final straw. Already, the gloom and disappointment among Labour supporters is evident: that non-violent scallywag, Millsy, has already conceded defeat. And he’s already trying to apportion blame.

And so they should. Labour have not possessed the agenda at any time during this campaign. They produced an appallingly-judged budget that preached fiscal austerity and loudly proclaimed that there was no room for tax cuts, and then proceeded to up the ante by entering into a bidding war with the state purse. Their entire crusade was based on attacking the personal integrity of National’s leader, rather than trumpeting its own successes.

To be fair, National has engaged in some fuckups of their own, which logically should have killed their chances to wrestle the Treasury benches off Labour in times of boom; but like Bob Clarkson, the shit hasn’t stuck. Instead of wallowing in the mud that Labour has thrown, National has brushed it off, recomposed itself, and moved to its next platform.

Labour, of course, has been stretching the bounds of credulity to excess. They cannot continue to make Don Brash’s ability to lead the entire focus of their campaign, and maintain that he doesn’t have the strength to govern. That argument gets tired quickly. And after a while, the public start to realise that the only reason Labour has paid him so much attention is that they have nothing else in their arsenal.

Labour being Labour, there will be recriminations. Trevor Mallard and Michael Cullen will be quickly removed. Steve Maharey, who has chaired Labour’s communications strategy, will be similarly ditched. Pete Hodgson, the cunning strategist who designed Labour’s collapse, has much to answer for.

And then there are those who will emerge crisp and clean, without rancour or culpability. Phil Goff has taken a low profile throughout this campaign, and is the most senior Labour MP with genuine leadership potential. Annette King would provide an unthreatening, logical choice for deputy. So too would Paul Swain, except that Labour would never allow two men to hold the two senior party offices. David Cunliffe is sufficiently brazen to inherit Mallard’s turd-kicking role.

But after that, the numbers get very thin. Labour will take a very long time to regroup. Mike Williams won’t survive the presidency, but Ross Wilson is a likely contender from the CTU.

Either way, on election night, there will be a lot of red on the floor at Labour Party Campaign Headquarters. And it won’t all be streamers and popped balloons.

[LFC]

I think National will get more seats than Labour just.

But I think the Greens will hold the balance of power and Labour will get the Maori Party who will win 2 seats and the Alliance Party with 1 seat on their side too to form a Labour/Green/Maori Party/Alliance coalition.

Can anyone explain to me why getting into debt to fund tax cuts is a good thing, my gf was saying that it is they way all businesses work, borrow money to fund growth in the economy.

But isn't it even better to use your surplus to fund growth than give everyone tax cuts.

The only advantage I can see of tax cuts is that gives people a bit more to spend, boosts the economy by people buying more, but then doesn't that fuel inflation?

[Dan]

Originally posted by Nambio
im pretty sure ACT supports the min $12 wage, which must be what they mean when they say "abolish current laws"

'Minimum Logic to Minimum Wage Change' http://www.act.org.nz/item.aspx/23549

No, they want to scrap it. It's part of the whole "everyone should be free to make contracts with whoever they want, all individuals are capable of making their own decisions, and economic coercion doesn't really exist!!!11!" rubbish.

[Bent]

Originally posted by DMZ Funnel Web
Another good read from IP http://insolentprick.blogspot.com/

What a load of bollocks.

He speaks like he knows the internals of the labour party and gives the entire shit stained glasses treatment to every action labour party members make. Only someone who is insecure about their own views calls respected academics such as Jon Johansson "a liberal pinko commie academic" or "a fake".

[Helious]

Originally posted by Bent
What a load of bollocks.

He speaks like he knows the internals of the labour party and gives the entire shit stained glasses treatment to every action labour party members make. Only someone who is insecure about their own views calls respected academics such as Jon Johansson "a liberal pinko commie academic" or "a fake".

Well said brother

[Sgt Seb]

Here's my new prediction after careful analysis of NZ'er voting patterns.

If it is grey and rainy - National win.

If it is mostly blue and sunny - Labour win.

:D

[DMZ Funnel Web]

Originally posted by Bent

Only someone who is insecure about their own views calls respected academics such as Jon Johansson "a liberal pinko commie academic" or "a fake".

Bahahahaha...Respected!...by who? Helen?

[[WanG] Wandarah]

http://www.vuw.ac.nz/pols/Staff/jjohansson.aspx

At least a couple of people, I'd say.

[Bent]

Originally posted by DMZ Funnel Web
Bahahahaha...Respected!...by who? Helen?

Excuse me, but your ignorance is showing.

[Golden Teapot]

Originally posted by LFC
Can anyone explain to me why getting into debt to fund tax cuts is a good thing, my gf was saying that it is they way all businesses work, borrow money to fund growth in the economy.

There are lots of reasons why this can be a good idea.

Bear in mind National are only planning to fund some infrastructure like this. Infrastructure lasts for fifty plus years.

So, one reason for taking out a loan and paying it off is that this creates more equity between generations of tax payers. Those yet to be born will benefit from such expenditure and in a fair society should thus help foot the bill. The overall cost goes up a bit but the equity between generations of tax payers improves far more.

Another reason is that Governement debt is very secure and some businesses need long-term investment opportunities to manage their own risk. Life insurance companies are in this boat. Here Governement borrowing is almost like a social-service for companies needing long term safe ways to invest. In some countries where governements no longer need to borrow, they do continue to borrow for this exact reason. It's not just companies that benefit from Governement debt either - pensioners (with assets) can too since they can lend the Governement a lump-sum and effectively get a pension back with no risk of default.

Governement debt is very healthy if it's managed properly.

[JERI]

I wonder...has there been any example of a country going bankrupt because the government didn't handle its debt properly?

[MoP]

Argentina? They're totally fucked right now

[crocos]

I predict that no matter who gets in, they'll be derrided as fucking the economy up, despite the current downward shide being mostly beyond their control.

[LFC]

How much debt does NZ have now and how much is it compared to other countries?

[dead goon]

yay labour!

[kimmyh51]

Anyone know if you can vote if you forgot to enroll ( well I moved a wk ago so Im not in the right electorate etc)


I have a horrid feeling national are going to get in - I hope im wrong - not on policy of either party, but because I dont trust national - i dont think they give a fuck about people, i feel safer with labour in govt.

[CCS]

Originally posted by kimmyh51
Anyone know if you can vote if you forgot to enroll

Yeah. Of course you can. Sure, why not? I don't know why anyone bothers to enroll at all!

[MadMax]

you can vote on the day, just more forms to fill out.

[Golden Teapot]

Originally posted by kimmyh51
Anyone know if you can vote if you forgot to enroll ( well I moved a wk ago so Im not in the right electorate etc)

You did not forget to enroll and you have not lived in your new electorate long enough to be eligible to vote in it.

Right now, due to having just awoken, I can't find words to adequately describe how terminally stupid you seem to be. Perhaps it wasn't a good idea to resuscitate you at birth (and don't pretend you learned to breath by yourself)?

[CCS]

Originally posted by Golden Teapot
Right now, due to having just awoken, I can't find words to adequately describe how terminally stupid you seem to be. Perhaps it wasn't a good idea to resuscitate you at birth (and don't pretend you learned to breath by yourself)?

QTF.

That Golden Teapot, he may be a controversial talkin' fellow... but right now he is 100% correct.

[CCS]

It's not like Kimmy was unaware of the drive to enrol.

[Lightspeed]

Originally posted by Sgt Seb
Here's my new prediction after careful analysis of NZ'er voting patterns.

If it is grey and rainy - National win.

If it is mostly blue and sunny - Labour win.

It'd be interesting to find a statistical way of finding out whether the weather has any bearing on voting, controlling for all the other factors influencing a voting.

[Rince]

Beautiful post, GT... just beautiful

[Golden Teapot]

Originally posted by Lightspeed
It'd be interesting to find a statistical way of finding out whether the weather has any bearing on voting, controlling for all the other factors influencing a voting.

On, come along this is easy.

Think about a paint manufacturing machine that produces on average 5000 tins of paint per day. Pull the power plug out and tell me how many sample points you'd need to decide that electricity has an impact on paint output.

[fidgit]

Originally posted by Lightspeed
It'd be interesting to find a statistical way of finding out whether the weather has any bearing on voting, controlling for all the other factors influencing a voting.

Whilst looking through ACT's website the other day to find their policy on minimum wage (couldn't find anything o_O) - I stumbled upon a piece written by one of them, in which they make the point that 22% of voters vote based on stupid shit you can't control, like the weather. The author didn't quote sources.

[DMZ_Chainsaw]

Originally posted by Sgt Seb
Here's my new prediction after careful analysis of NZ'er voting patterns.

If it is grey and rainy - National win.

If it is mostly blue and sunny - Labour win.

its a dark cloudy and windy day atm at Long Bay - we'll see if your prediction is right.

[LFC]

Originally posted by DMZ_Chainsaw
its a dark cloudy and windy day atm at Long Bay - we'll see if your prediction is right.

You in the East Coast Bays electorate?

[DMZ_Chainsaw]

Originally posted by Golden Teapot
Right now, due to having just awoken, I can't find words to adequately describe how terminally stupid you seem to be. Perhaps it wasn't a good idea to resuscitate you at birth (and don't pretend you learned to breath by yourself)?

Bravo bravo... QOTD, maybe even the week.

[A Corpse]

Originally posted by fidgit
The author didn't quote sources.

Then the author has 0 credibility.

[DMZ_Chainsaw]

Originally posted by LFC
You in the East Coast Bays electorate?

Yeah - will shortly be heading to Long Bay Baptist to cast my vote.

[Lightspeed]

Originally posted by Golden Teapot
On, come along this is easy.

Think about a paint manufacturing machine that produces on average 5000 tins of paint per day. Pull the power plug out and tell me how many sample points you'd need to decide that electricity has an impact on paint output.

Maybe I could have worded my post better. In your example, power obviously has a major effect if it is taken away, but with power, there would be many other factors that influence the factory's output. If you wanted to find out what influence a specific factor has, you would control for whether the plant had power or not.

So we'll assume weather does have an influence, but controller for other factors we could find out to what degree that influence is.

Or maybe I just missed your point completely.

[Golden Teapot]

Originally posted by Lightspeed
So we'll assume weather does have an influence, but controller for other factors we could find out to what degree that influence is.

Or maybe I just missed your point completely.

I have heard that the impact of bad weather is quite severe in keeping lower socio-economic groups from voting. I can imagine a very tenable physical process explaining this and so I'm inclined to allow opinion (or is this judgement) to guide me.

I'm very sympathetic to your view on the need to remove confounding effects. With three yearly sample points and a rapidly changing world I don't think it would be possible to measure the real impact of anything that dosen't fall into the "obvious" category.

I'm particularly unimpressed with the view that the polls are taking on voter swing occuring; for my part, I expect it's inept survey taking that's the issue. I think the margin-of-error they quote are clearly wrong - the assumptions made in those calcualtion are very obviously invalid. Given they (the poll takers) don't realise this I think there is no chance that they have conducted their polls correctly.

I expect Labour will win. I am already feeling sorry for the inevitable suffering for poorer families three years hence (who will lose income but not the new debt they are supporting).

I'm glad ACT is gone. Who the fuck did they represent?

Sadly, the radical Greens will get in based on the colour of their logo.

The maori party deserve to get it - they represent their electorate very well; I loath their racist point of view though.

[Ashley]

Voted for the first time, yay.

[Sgt Seb]

I think the weather will have a large impact because people are so fickle about who they are going to vote for. They will 1) decide on the way to the booth. 2) vote based on their 'mood at the time'.

And it is rainy now...although it was sunny in the morning. So maybe my theory if valid (hah!) will cancel itself out.

ps. Voting took me like 1 min, gg nz electoral commission, who said government departments couldn't be efficient?

[yem]

Where I voted (Maungaphau primary school in Balmoral) there were two besuited people standing behind the officials wearing great big National Party badge/ribbons. What's up with that? Observers?

[::Shocker]

Scrutineers

[yem]

Ah interesting. I wouldn't have thought they were allowed to advertise their party so blatantly but meh. Ta.

[QWERTY?]

yeh there were three people with big LABOUR badges on where i voted