Beyond the Wall
 

or, like, Warkworth.

NORTHLAND BY-ELECTION, BITCHES!

Mike Sabin? Never heard of him! Come on down Mark Osborne!

Willow-Jean Prime? Under the bus with you!

Winston Peters? AGHHHH KILL IT WITH FIRE!

Is one of the bluest electorates in the country going to kick John Key in the nuts?

It's really is anyone's guess. It would be great for the opposition if Peters won but yeah a big ask in this electorate.

Would it really be great for the opposition?

National are putting everything they've got into winning this. Shit Key is even cutting short his Japan visit to campaign in Northland. The opposition winning a safe government seat would be hugely embarrassing for National. Also they wouldn't be a able to pass the RMA reforms and would need to rely on a vote from MP or UF just to pass legislation.

Perhaps Winston will become the unexpected hero who will save the world from the TPPA.

That.

Winston is a problem for both the government, and the opposition, the sooner he's gone, the better, for everyone.

I really hope he wins. Two things I hope get scuppered for this government: signing the TPPA and changing the flag.

My uncle (Bruce Rogan) is running as an Independent. You may recognise him as one of the instigators and leaders of the Kaipara rates strike. Oh, and when he quoted Shakespeare to punctuate a letter to Nick Smith and it was misinterpreted as a personal threat.

I dunno, he's a pretty good opposition MP I would have thought. Gold card FTW! ;)

He can play the game alright

Peters: Nats covering up Sabin issue
http://www.3news.co.nz/nznews/winsto...1918?ref=video

.

Based on afterthought, I won't post what I was going to. But yeah... dig hard enough, and it's all out there.

Yeah it's bad. And if Northland voters think that National knew about this and still backed Sabin into Northland - then this might explain why National aren't dominating their seat.

I call BS spin on this graph

Yeh - it's misleading. Instead of per-capita it should be per National voter since these folk are by and large the ones who pay net tax.

I'm sure you have solid grounds for saying that.

The old vampire is caning it in the latest 3News poll:

He's still holding that Ace up his sleeve too.

National got destroyed. They put everything they've got and still lost by 4000 votes. Wasn't expecting that.

Part of the problem was, has anyone heard of the guy they tried to run against Winston? Like Winston or dislike him (and I must confess I'm not a huge fan) he has a lot of name recognition.

Either that, or Northland residents are sick of National ignoring them.

http://www.electionresults.govt.nz/electorate-35.html
Owned.gif

Well this changes things somewhat doesn't it? Excellent.

Not really. If Dunne retires during this term though...

So MMP.. now that Winston has an electorate seat, does that mean he should lose a list seat ?

And now that National has lost an Electorate Seat, shouldn't they gain one list seat to make the equation balanced again.

Can see why the ACT guys are wanting a review of this.

No. Why would they? It's not about "balancing it out" That would make National over-represented with the party vs electorate votes.

Instead they need to recalc everything - it may actually end up with NZF with two additional seats if they hit threshold.

It's complicated.

http://publicaddress.net/speaker/so-...st-mp-or-does/

Ok, over simplified, but here goes (numbers below are not actual, just easier to show my workings with simple numbers)...

If NZ 1st got 10% of the party vote on election night 2014 and failed to get any Electorate seats, they would be entitled to 10 list seats as they exceeded the 5% threshold.

Now they have got an electorate seat, they should get a top up of only 9 list seats to make them back up to the 10% that their 2014 party vote entitled them to.

Whereas with National, they got 50% of the 2014 party vote, and 42 electorate seats, which gave them a top up (list seats) of another 8 list MP's. Total of 50 mp's.

Now they lose a seat, drop to 41 electorate - but their list over hang should top them up by another list MP (41+9) to reflect the % of vote they received.

Threshold only applies when you do not secure any electorate seats, which is moot in this case as % party vote for NZF was >5% on election night.

Now after reading that post that Ab has linked to, things get just batshit crazy. For #1 - Winston can not decide who get's in as his new list MP, it has to be the next person on the list, unless they do not want the role.

So my take on it is that the number of PMs based on the list are set.
So if National are 42+18, that is set at 42 elected and 18 list. If a person on the list retires, they are replaced.
But if someone that is elected resigns, then their seat (and only their seat) is up for the change.
So because National lost, they are now 41+18.

So NZ first were 0+10. Peters resigns from the list, they still keep their 10, and he was elected so they are now 1+11.

Note: the Labour candidate received only 4.6% of the vote - down from 25.9% on General Election night. In other words, it looks like just about all of the Labour voters in Northland voted for someone other than the Labour candidate in order to ensure that National got a bloody nose.

Nice work Labour, that's how MMP works. But please - no more butthurt about Epsom and Ohariu, OK?

I see your point though I reckon Northland is a bit different because it didn't involve the coattail effect ie.

https://dimpost.wordpress.com/2015/03/10/deals/