- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Sunday, August 14, 2005

ELECTION BOOK UPDATE: Labour polling: who won the TV3 debate?

Have just been telephone polled by UMR-Insight. Questions obviously for and about the Labour party in bold.

The full set of questions:
How certain are you to vote at this election?
Is the government on the right track or wrong track?
Party vote?
"Any chance you would vote Labour?" (Answer: Ha, ha - No!)
Local vote? (Answer: Hopefully an independent)
How did you vote in 2002 election?
Would National or Labour lead the next government?
"Does Labour deserve to be re-elected?" (Answer: No, but National doesn't deserve to be elected either.)
What's your single most important issue? (Answer: Justice, but not law and order - procedural fairness. Poller then creates seperate category)
Which party would best deal with that issue?
Party leaders: How do you rate:
Helen Clark?
Winston Peters?
Don Brash? (Answer: Very unfavourably to all three)
Which party has the best policies for New Zealand's future?
Who do you think has had the most impressive campaign?
Who is doing the most mud-slinging? (Answer: Labour)
Who do you think has made the most unaffordable promises?
Who has concentrated on the most important issues?
TV3 Leaders debate: who won?
Household/income/age questions etc. including:
Do you have a student loan? (Answer: Yes).


The student loan responses will be interesting to see what sort of inroads Labour have made and whether they are at the Greens' expense. Mudslinging too - but some people might think that it works and/or is a positive and legitimate tool. Also the expectations of who will lead the government regardless of one's personal preference is a good indication of the electorate's mood. If National can't chip away at that they are stuffed - although their support seems to be holding up in the latest polls. Problem with being polled at home on a lovely sunny Sunday is that people will be rather unconcerned or optimistic than realistic when asked about issues.

-------------LATEST NEWS---------------
Centrebet's new odds (14/08) for next PM seem to have calmed down after the latest Fairfax poll:
CLARK $1.46
BRASH $2.50
PETERS $501.00
HIDE $1001.00

Fairfax poll: (13/08):
LAB 42%, NAT 41%, NZF 6%, GRN 6%, UNF 2%, MAO 1%, ACT 1%
Herald on Sunday Digipoll (14/08):
LAB 45%, NAT 38%, NZF 7%, GRN 4%, MAO 2.4%, ACT 1.6%, UNF 0.7%, PRG 0.3%

The odds remain unchanged (Centrebet is drifting back in my direction after over-reacting to the TV3 debate):

-------------CURRENT ODDS--------------
-----2005 New Zealand General Election-----

Punters are invited to make their selections in the comments section. I will fix the odds shortly and display your name on the board next to your selection.

Option 2: Nat-Lab head-to-head largest party vote.
was $1.60 now $1.55 Labour
was $2.20 now $2.30 National

2 Comments:

At 14/8/05 9:05 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Surely Winston is a goer - if the rumors about being a shared PM are to be believed...

 
At 14/8/05 11:57 pm, Blogger t selwyn said...

Intriguing. I've heard the scenario put as legacy/vanity on Peters' part and desperation/limousines on the Nats' side.

Not entirely convinced. How would it be justified? Just for the first three months as PM while the new kid learns to wear long trousers? It's a real pride-fucker isn't it. Then again... if you could be in power for the next 33 of the next 36 months, why not? Win-win??!! But if he only scrapes together 5-6% it would be hard to justify.

Maybe as a "managed leadership transition provision" from Brash to Brownlee (or Key or whoever) with Winston in the middle as inter-regnum as part of his coalition deal to make sure he isn't Shipleyed like last time, when they roll the boss and replace them with Peters' enemy? It would give a certainty etc. and Brash would like it too because it means that if he gets rolled at least the guy who knifed him is going to be stuck with Winston for three months before taking over!! So if Centrebet could change it's odds to "who will be a PM in the next term" Winston would be up there I reckon.

So, Brash - Peters - X as the line of succession...? Put that in your conspiracy pipe and smoke it! It's making a sickeningly logical and even, dare I say it, reasonable sense.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home