Ironically someone said something today and in my mind I thought “I need data on swing voters to form a view”. And voila. Thanks for a great article and good luck in the new role.
I am one of the switchers - Labour in 2020, National in 2023. Until recently I would have voted for National again. Now I’m a don’t know. Auckland resident, male, 60’s, affluent. Increasingly feeling Luxon fails to communicate/connect, and is out of his depth on what to do to address the core long term issues NZ faces - disgusted the other day hearing him say on RNZ ‘we are open to ideas’. It is the government which is supposed to have the ideas, to address eg low productivity which is the root cause of much of our economic issues. If they don’t why did they want to be elected?! Not a fan of Willis. Impressed though by Bishop, Stanford, Penk, Brown. They are doing many good things. But the government has badly dropped the ball on the ferries. And it is a major major Achilles heel for the government’s credibility on availability of funds for various initiatives in a recession, that they gave nearly $1 billion back to landlords in their first budget. I’m also unimpressed by the government on climate change - seem to be just paying lip service, not genuine, and on the smoking law reversal.
So I would be a reluctant repeat National voter in an election tomorrow. But I’m too centrist to vote Act, certainly not the Greens with their dreamland economic policies, and not yet ready to vote Labour again after their failure to achieve much in their second term, and unless they say they will not coalition with current Te Parti Moari - though no prob with TPM of Turia & Sharples.
Wish there were Teal candidates like in Aus! Socially progressive, economically sensible.
So in an election tomorrow I might reluctantly vote National again but mainly because of younger ministers not the leadership, and with substantial disapproval for some of their actions to date. But I am now far more prepared to switch to Labour again than I was at the last election. It would be the lesser of two evils. Or abstain.
Interesting reading. I know there's a lot of people who describe the Green's economic thinking as deranged, but I was (respectfully) interested what nonpartisan source this idea was coming from. I'm not a Green member but as far as I could tell, they are the only party with a fully-costed alternative budget (worked on with Treasury). It seems most parties are completely unwilling to put the public money where their mouth is, so their dismissal of the Green's finances as a "clown show" (in context of current austerity and waste) seems to me to be a bit sanctimonious from them?
Thank you Henry- very informative. A question: The general election turnout in 2020 was 82.24% and 78.2% in 2023. Does the survey you quote or other surveys indicate whether proportionately more people who voted for Labour in 2020 not vote at all in 2023?
I think it should be very easy to work out who to vote for if you follow the money. If you are a OK with money going to landlords, tobacco, overseas corporates and banks, to the already wealthy, notice that tax cuts worked best for people who already have enough to live comfortably, notice that Best Start payments also benefit most those that have money. Notice that they would rather build prisons than houses etc.
Then look at where the money hasn't been flowing, health, education, infrastructure, housing, homelessness, addressing inequality. If you want a country to be a great place to live you don't leave it with poor health care, poor housing, poor education, poor people having to use food banks when they are working full time jobs and still can't make ends meet. Kids going to school having empty bellies, no shoes on their feet, eating terrible school lunches, living in cars. None of this demonstrates to them that they are valued and they have a bright future. Turn the tide, tax heavily the mega wealthy and use the money to get NZ back on its feet again.
This obsession with percentages is common in news media coverage of politics. But the raw voter numbers tell a very different story.
After the 2023 election, I compared the number of votes for each party with their 2020 results. Before specials were counted, there was a swing to the right bloc of about 200,000 votes. But Labour's vote dropped by well over 800,000.
Greens/TPM went up about 50,000 between them. Winston First's vote only went up about as many, and ACT's vote actually *dropped* by about 15,000. So the vast majority of those who voted Labour in 2020 swung to the No Idea Party, not to National, nor the right bloc in general.
The "swing voter" is a dinosaur (no offence Greg), a species mostly wiped out by the asteroid of MMP elections. But for some reason political journalists can't get past covering elections as a 2 horse race.
Posting this prompted me to redo my numbers based on the final results, and I'm embarrassed to admit the corrected vote number changes pretty much wipes out my thesis above. Turns out one can even fool oneself with statistics ; )
After all votes were counted, the swing to the right was more than twice what it appeared to be on the night; 472,524. This is about 2/3 of the votes that left Labour. So embarrassingly for me and the election night reckons I've been rehashing since, it does suggest a huge swing to the right. Even when you include the almost total collapse of the New Conservative vote. #MeaCulpa
The ACT vote went up in the end, not down. But only by about a quarter of the Greens' gains, whose vote grew by 50% on 2020, and Winston First's whose vote more than doubled. Ouch.
Thanks Henry, that is some really interesting analysis (although I had to re-read a few bits to get my slightly addled mind fully around what it meant). Good luck at The Post
Great article. Thanks for taking the time and effort to read it. Now if only there was one more centrist option that wasn't NZ First or Act maybe they would help 'centralise' the worst tendencies of the main parties.
Perhaps this wasn't what you meant but this reads like you're implying Winston First and ACT are centrist. In what parallel universe? Both are to the right of the Nats, who are currently as far to the hard right as they were in 1990-93.
As Kumara Republic says, the idea of "centre" parties has collapsed. A good thing too. As Dunne Future ably demonstrated, they are inevitably unprincipled hacks, who will vote for anything that allows them to keep their Parliamentary privileges.
Winston First used to play that game too. But since 2020 they seem to have decided that cookers and white supremacists lacked Parliamentary representation.
Peter Dunne struggled to keep one going, and TOP has struggled to get into Parliament. Centrist options all over the world are struggling to hold under the weight of reactionary populism and a billionaire class that's a law unto itself.
As a Switcher in both 2020 and 2023, I feel burnt by your magnifying glass!
To me the 2020 Nat-to-Labour shift was about the unique appeal to non-Left voters of Ardern’s handling of Covid: hitting the buttons of prudence, self-responsibility, national unity, clear leadership. All this appeal was gone in 2023 so trooping back to National was quite easy for most of those 2020 Switchers (though not at all easy for me).
If National can make itself resemble its Switcher-friendly Key-English form and if Labour continues to look like it did under most of its recent leaders, then Luxon will keep most Switchers. If not (plus, in my view, if Hipkins stands down), many Switchers will Switch again.
Worth reading to the end just for that last line 🤣 - thanks Henry
Ironically someone said something today and in my mind I thought “I need data on swing voters to form a view”. And voila. Thanks for a great article and good luck in the new role.
I am one of the switchers - Labour in 2020, National in 2023. Until recently I would have voted for National again. Now I’m a don’t know. Auckland resident, male, 60’s, affluent. Increasingly feeling Luxon fails to communicate/connect, and is out of his depth on what to do to address the core long term issues NZ faces - disgusted the other day hearing him say on RNZ ‘we are open to ideas’. It is the government which is supposed to have the ideas, to address eg low productivity which is the root cause of much of our economic issues. If they don’t why did they want to be elected?! Not a fan of Willis. Impressed though by Bishop, Stanford, Penk, Brown. They are doing many good things. But the government has badly dropped the ball on the ferries. And it is a major major Achilles heel for the government’s credibility on availability of funds for various initiatives in a recession, that they gave nearly $1 billion back to landlords in their first budget. I’m also unimpressed by the government on climate change - seem to be just paying lip service, not genuine, and on the smoking law reversal.
So I would be a reluctant repeat National voter in an election tomorrow. But I’m too centrist to vote Act, certainly not the Greens with their dreamland economic policies, and not yet ready to vote Labour again after their failure to achieve much in their second term, and unless they say they will not coalition with current Te Parti Moari - though no prob with TPM of Turia & Sharples.
Wish there were Teal candidates like in Aus! Socially progressive, economically sensible.
So in an election tomorrow I might reluctantly vote National again but mainly because of younger ministers not the leadership, and with substantial disapproval for some of their actions to date. But I am now far more prepared to switch to Labour again than I was at the last election. It would be the lesser of two evils. Or abstain.
Thanks for the insight Greg it is very good to hear from an actual switcher!
Interesting reading. I know there's a lot of people who describe the Green's economic thinking as deranged, but I was (respectfully) interested what nonpartisan source this idea was coming from. I'm not a Green member but as far as I could tell, they are the only party with a fully-costed alternative budget (worked on with Treasury). It seems most parties are completely unwilling to put the public money where their mouth is, so their dismissal of the Green's finances as a "clown show" (in context of current austerity and waste) seems to me to be a bit sanctimonious from them?
FWIW The landlord tax cuts was $2.9b.
Take a look at TOP, Greg.
Out of curiosity, did you ever vote for the Social Credit/Democrats?
Thank you Henry- very informative. A question: The general election turnout in 2020 was 82.24% and 78.2% in 2023. Does the survey you quote or other surveys indicate whether proportionately more people who voted for Labour in 2020 not vote at all in 2023?
I think it should be very easy to work out who to vote for if you follow the money. If you are a OK with money going to landlords, tobacco, overseas corporates and banks, to the already wealthy, notice that tax cuts worked best for people who already have enough to live comfortably, notice that Best Start payments also benefit most those that have money. Notice that they would rather build prisons than houses etc.
Then look at where the money hasn't been flowing, health, education, infrastructure, housing, homelessness, addressing inequality. If you want a country to be a great place to live you don't leave it with poor health care, poor housing, poor education, poor people having to use food banks when they are working full time jobs and still can't make ends meet. Kids going to school having empty bellies, no shoes on their feet, eating terrible school lunches, living in cars. None of this demonstrates to them that they are valued and they have a bright future. Turn the tide, tax heavily the mega wealthy and use the money to get NZ back on its feet again.
This obsession with percentages is common in news media coverage of politics. But the raw voter numbers tell a very different story.
After the 2023 election, I compared the number of votes for each party with their 2020 results. Before specials were counted, there was a swing to the right bloc of about 200,000 votes. But Labour's vote dropped by well over 800,000.
Greens/TPM went up about 50,000 between them. Winston First's vote only went up about as many, and ACT's vote actually *dropped* by about 15,000. So the vast majority of those who voted Labour in 2020 swung to the No Idea Party, not to National, nor the right bloc in general.
The "swing voter" is a dinosaur (no offence Greg), a species mostly wiped out by the asteroid of MMP elections. But for some reason political journalists can't get past covering elections as a 2 horse race.
Posting this prompted me to redo my numbers based on the final results, and I'm embarrassed to admit the corrected vote number changes pretty much wipes out my thesis above. Turns out one can even fool oneself with statistics ; )
After all votes were counted, the swing to the right was more than twice what it appeared to be on the night; 472,524. This is about 2/3 of the votes that left Labour. So embarrassingly for me and the election night reckons I've been rehashing since, it does suggest a huge swing to the right. Even when you include the almost total collapse of the New Conservative vote. #MeaCulpa
The ACT vote went up in the end, not down. But only by about a quarter of the Greens' gains, whose vote grew by 50% on 2020, and Winston First's whose vote more than doubled. Ouch.
Very clear reading. Thanks
Thanks Henry, that is some really interesting analysis (although I had to re-read a few bits to get my slightly addled mind fully around what it meant). Good luck at The Post
the data helps answer the question I often ask. what are the options for the swing voters, who a disillusioned with the current government
I switched way back from Labour to TOP. The Opportunity Party.
The Greens are also a good fit for me . I donate to both parties .
Great article. Thanks for taking the time and effort to read it. Now if only there was one more centrist option that wasn't NZ First or Act maybe they would help 'centralise' the worst tendencies of the main parties.
Perhaps this wasn't what you meant but this reads like you're implying Winston First and ACT are centrist. In what parallel universe? Both are to the right of the Nats, who are currently as far to the hard right as they were in 1990-93.
As Kumara Republic says, the idea of "centre" parties has collapsed. A good thing too. As Dunne Future ably demonstrated, they are inevitably unprincipled hacks, who will vote for anything that allows them to keep their Parliamentary privileges.
Winston First used to play that game too. But since 2020 they seem to have decided that cookers and white supremacists lacked Parliamentary representation.
Peter Dunne struggled to keep one going, and TOP has struggled to get into Parliament. Centrist options all over the world are struggling to hold under the weight of reactionary populism and a billionaire class that's a law unto itself.
As a Switcher in both 2020 and 2023, I feel burnt by your magnifying glass!
To me the 2020 Nat-to-Labour shift was about the unique appeal to non-Left voters of Ardern’s handling of Covid: hitting the buttons of prudence, self-responsibility, national unity, clear leadership. All this appeal was gone in 2023 so trooping back to National was quite easy for most of those 2020 Switchers (though not at all easy for me).
If National can make itself resemble its Switcher-friendly Key-English form and if Labour continues to look like it did under most of its recent leaders, then Luxon will keep most Switchers. If not (plus, in my view, if Hipkins stands down), many Switchers will Switch again.