Winston Peters humiliates National up north
Winston Peters has proved political pundits
spectacularly wrong in Northland, his home turf. A decisive 54% vote in his
favour means that the latest pre-election opinion polls were close to the mark,
and that early predictions of an easy National win were proven drastically
wrong.
On the prediction-trading website iPredict,
the price for betting on ‘National candidate to win Northland by-election’
dropped from around 90 cents in the first week of March to well below 20 cents
by the Saturday of the by-election itself. Smirks on National supporters’ faces
turned to alarm as opinion polls first showed Winston level with National’s
newby candidate, and then had him streaking ahead. Quite a few people blew their
money by punting on National. So, what went wrong?
In the 2014 General Election, only about 4,500
(12.7%) gave their party vote to NZ First. Because NZ First did not have a
candidate in that election, which candidate did they vote for as a ‘second
preference’? About two thirds of them ticked the Labour candidate. Far fewer
went to National’s candidate and to the others. So, on that base of support for
NZ First, there was a stronger cross-affiliation between Labour and NZ First
than between National and NZ First.
But, because National’s former MP, Mike
Sabin, got 52% support as candidate, in order to win the by-election, Mr Peters
had to pull votes away from National as well as from the left – or at least
hope that a lot of erstwhile National supporters stayed at home. The left-wing
voters, if they ganged up against National and voted for Peters, were not numerically
strong enough to get Peters across the line on their own.
So, Peters had the challenge of appealing
to both the right and the left of the spectrum. And he totally out-classed the
inexperienced Mr Osborne on the campaign trail. NZ First lacked National’s
street-level organizational forces, including troops brought in from Auckland,
to rally voters on the day. So, the result in favour of Mr Peters has to be
attributed to his own widely recognised persona, his street-level campaigning,
and his effective use of the media.
On the day, though, the turnout was significantly
lower than at the general election, so it’s hard to draw quick conclusions about
how many voters switched allegiances and how many just stayed at home. But it’s
safe to say that those who had previously supported the Labour candidate,
Willow-Jean Prime, mostly voted tactically for Peters, and probably many Green
supporters did too. Peters probably stole quite a number of erstwhile National
supporters, but many of them perhaps didn’t vote at all. The differences from
last year’s Labour, Green and ‘other’ voters almost add up to Winston’s 15,359
votes. But it seems unlikely that he did not also benefit from a good number of
defections from the National camp.
Labour came in for criticism for doing an
Epsom-style maneuver, more or less telling their supporters not to waste their
votes on the Labour candidate, but to give it to Peters. Labour were already
committed, however, to fielding a candidate by the time it became obvious that
Peters could win. So Labour’s Willow-Jean Prime could not be withdrawn from the
ballot. In any case, Labour needed to keep their candidate and their party in the
race, and not to let down their staunchest supporters.
The by-election would not have happened at
all had National not fielded Mark Sabin as their candidate at last year’s
election. His standing down, under unexplained circumstances, triggered the
by-election. National thought they could sleep-walk to victory, but
they hadn’t counted on Peters as a potential candidate. The National Party ended up in the
damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t corner, thanks to a series of electoral blunders. And they couldn’t fight their way
out of it because their candidate simply couldn’t overcome the Peters effect.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home