Do the KCs believe in democracy
37 minutes ago
Thursday, October 02, 2008
National touting for Maori Party Votes?
Now the claimant is hardly reliable but somebody else must be able to confirm this. Hekia Parata, standing in Mana, is asking people to give their party vote to the Maori Party according to Winston Peters. If so, isn't it saying something that National would rather deal with the Maori Party and their fantastic policy planks, than ACT?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Or is it a cunning strategy to reduce the overhang created by the Maori Party? The larger the overhang becomes the harder it will be for National to gain a majority. Convincing voters who would have voted for a Maori Party candidate and Labour with the Party vote to double tick the Maori could actually help National regardless of any post election coalition arrangements. Assuming of course that those voters are a lot more common than potential Maori / National voters which seems reasonable to me.
Anon, You've lost me. How would extra party votes for the Maori Party reduce the overhang which will come out of their successful contention of the Maori seats?
"Convincing voters who would have voted for a Maori Party candidate and Labour with the Party vote to double tick the Maori could actually help National regardless of any post election coalition arrangements."
The only Maori Party candidates are in the Maori electorates.
She must be asking Mana voters to give her their electorate vote and the Maori Party their party vote. That may take the party vote away from Labour but it will almost certainly be a wasted vote. But she must think that Maori are more likely to give their party vote to the Maori Party than to National. It's pretty cynical really.
There is only an overhang if the number of seats the Maori Party win is greater than their proportion of party votes. But if they win, say six electorate seats, and get a 5% party vote, there is no overhang - their number of seats is proportional. So asking Labour voters to party vote Maori is a pretty good strategy for the Nats. It's far better for them if they are at 6% than if they are at 3%, ironically.
Sorry for the confusion. I was in a rush and assumed Mana was a Maori electorate. My lame excuse is that I try to stay as far away from Wellington as possible ;)
So ignore the angle about Maori party electorate MPs. However, my point about of the Maori party overhang is still valid as Blair has confirmed. So long as National can convince more potential Labour supporters vote Maori Party on the party vote than potential National supporters then the National party comes out ahead. At least up to the point where there is no longer an overhang.
If this is the strategy then I think it's quite clever.
What Parata actually said.
"In my presentation I made it clear I was seeking their Party Vote support. As a throw away remark at the end of my presentation I did say that if they really did not feel they were able to give me their vote, they should consider the Maori Party."
"Now the claimant is hardly reliable..."
So who is so "hardly reliable" that you would quote them, Lindsay?
Or is it a cunning strategy to reduce the overhang created by the Maori Party?
precisely. Frankly, those Iwi are never going to vote ACT: it's much better for all concerned - including hardworking, taxpaying Kiwis - that they vote Maori rather than Labour or Green.
This reduces the effect of the Maorimander, and basically after the Maori Party has a couple of elections at 6% then
they will be quite happy to abolish the Maori seats (or even at 3% if they are abolished with a low treshold).
Funnily enough, the best way to get rid of the Maori seats under MMP is for Kiwi voters to party vote Maori for a couple of elections.
Post a Comment