POLL - who are you planning on voting for? THIS POLL IS NOW CLOSED.

[Logen Ninefingers]

I have never been polled by phone, but I do online surveys for various panels and there have been quite a few political surveys lately.

Interestingly, there may also be farmers swinging from National to ACT this time. My son commented the other day, that he likes ACT and Seymour, so I wouldn't be surprised if his (usually National) vote goes to ACT this time round. He probably won't be the only farmer considering it.

I have been re-reading ACT and National's policies today, and one or two of ACT's may not be quite as bad as I previously thought. But there are still some that concern me. So I am still on the fence.

There's probably a lot of National voters - including Farmers - that used to be rock-solid National that now vote more tactically. This is probably just the ongoing evolution of MMP continuing: people for whom the 'First Past The Post' mentality took a long time to break with. Once you've voted for a different party as farmers did in 2020 (where they saw the right couldn't win based on the polls so voted Labour to keep Greens influence out of government as much as possible) it becomes something you can do again. That election was a watershed moment that broke that tight connection to National, but Labour will not retain those votes.

[Aaron]

ACT on nearly 47% almost enough to govern alone. What a turn around. Hope not too many living in the share trader bubble are disappointed on election day, although ACT look to do well despite its policies.

[Logen Ninefingers]

ACT on nearly 47% almost enough to govern alone. What a turn around. Hope not too many living in the share trader bubble are disappointed on election day, although ACT look to do well despite its policies.

Not sure where you see a problem with ACT’s policies. I see ACT as a necessary counter-weight to the ‘maori are genetically superior’ racial narrative of Te Pati Maori & the ‘climate hysteria leading to acts of political violence’ ethos of the Greens. There are certainly radicals and extremists in this election race, but David Seymour isn’t one of them.

[Aaron]

Not sure where you see a problem with ACT’s policies. I see ACT as a necessary counter-weight to the ‘maori are genetically superior’ racial narrative of Te Pati Maori & the ‘climate hysteria leading to acts of political violence’ ethos of the Greens. There are certainly radicals and extremists in this election race, but David Seymour isn’t one of them.

I discussed my views on their tax policy on the ACT thread. Interesting that it is the social issues you raise rather than better economic management.

Newtons third law states that every for every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction. Maybe this is true in politics as well.

[Baa_Baa]

Well, I'm not sure what you all think yet, but I thought it would be a walkover debate from Hipkins with his extensive debating experience, but it was far from that! I have to say I was quite impressed by Luxon's temperate debating style and staying on message, he never once got riled or looked down at his notes, during responses, and articulated his responses very clearly and on point.

Whether we agree with what either of them said, I'd have to give the leaders debate to Luxon, he stuck it to Labour and promoted the National policies very effectively. Quite surprising really, I didn't expect that. In the forthcoming leaders debates, I suspect it will get a bit mongrel as Labour realise Luxon is a lot more onto it than they might have expected.

Hipkins really does have to find a way to undermine National, so far it doesn't seem to be working. JMO, and interested in what you all thoughts about the leaders debate.

[justakiwi]

I watched it, but to be honest, I was disappointed in both of them. Didn't learn anything new from either of them, and neither of them managed to avoid the sideways jibes at the other.

I also watched this afternoon's Infrastructure debate - which was the exact opposite. As I posted elsewhere, Simon Court and James Shaw both spoke extremely well, and all five speakers, kept it civil and contributed a lot of information that I was unaware of. That debate was worth watching and far more impressive than the Leaders debate was. The infrastructure debate had teeth, while the Leaders debate was a superficial summary of everything we have already heard.

Well, I'm not sure what you all think yet, but I thought it would be a walkover debate from Hipkins with his extensive debating experience, but it was far from that! I have to say I was quite impressed by Luxon's temperate debating style and staying on message, he never once got riled or looked down at his notes, during responses, and articulated his responses very clearly and on point.

Whether we agree with what either of them said, I'd have to give the leaders debate to Luxon, he stuck it to Labour and promoted the National policies very effectively. Quite surprising really, I didn't expect that. In the forthcoming leaders debates, I suspect it will get a bit mongrel as Labour realise Luxon is a lot more onto it than they might have expected.

Hipkins really does have to find a way to undermine National, so far it doesn't seem to be working. JMO, and interested in what you all thoughts about the leaders debate.

[Logen Ninefingers]

Luxon was very strong on the points he made, he hit back well when Chipkins went to attack him.
Chipkins would go hard at Luxon about something, then Luxon would say "well actually" and counter-punch him strongly.

I do think there will be right wing people out there - further right than me - who will be appalled at Luxon saying he thought Labour did an extremely good job with handling the first part of the COVID pandemic. I think they will be appalled with some of his positive comments regarding co-governance. I think there will be some appalled with him saying that he wants to provide free lunches in all schools. On the COVID front, there are some extremely angry people out there, and they do not want to hear one positive word about how the government handled the pandemic.

Personally I think Luxon spoke very well and will have re-assured a lot of people. Not the really hard right people though.

[Bjauck]

I am 90% sure I will vote National this election. There is a simple reason for it. I've lived in NZ for 35 years, basically all my adult life and have loved it. I have worked very hard all those years and NZ has been very good to me. My wife also immigrated to NZ around the same time (not together) and feels the same.
3 of our 4 children have left NZ this year as they don't like where this country is heading and have MUCH better opportunities elsewhere. Our youngest will no doubt head offshore when he finishes his apprenticeship in a couple of years.

I simply do not recognise this country anymore with the huge changes over the last few years, mostly for the worse in my view, and we are highly likely to leave NZ for good if there is not a change of Government and a serious change in direction. It would be against our will and all our plans. So we are voting for a change.

Having been probably to the left of you a few years ago, your post encapsulates my opinion now too, apart from leaving NZ. Unfortunately however I don’t think there will be the necessary sufficient change of direction, especially with regards to fiscal policy, even if National form the government.

Luxon has definitely improved with communicating policy.

[moka]

I discussed my views on their tax policy on the ACT thread. Interesting that it is the social issues you raise rather than better economic management.

Newtons third law states that every for every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction. Maybe this is true in politics as well.

A good observation that the issues raised are social issues rather than economic or political issues. I have noticed that the comments on these threads are more about identity politics than about politics itself or economic policies. We are engaged in culture wars which provides a distraction from the bigger issues of growing inequality. Culture wars are divisive and they provide a divide and rule strategy.

[Logen Ninefingers]

A good observation that the issues raised are social issues rather than economic or political issues. I have noticed that the comments on these threads are more about identity politics than about politics itself or economic policies. We are engaged in culture wars which provides a distraction from the bigger issues of growing inequality. Culture wars are divisive and they provide a divide and rule strategy.

Well you can't control what issues are important to other people.