Even elections can be interesting as long as a story can be made out of it. Arguably that is what makes sports interesting too, a story of who's underdog or dominant, or something. I dunno. I don't watch sports regularly
Unimpressively goaded by the bias of the right-wing media.. National are not center-right. They're solid-right, as shown by politicalcompass.org, and they're much more socially conservative than shown, also.
The political compass is notoriously slanted, so it's best to take their interpretations with a grain of salt (e.g. it puts Swedish left wing parties in the upper-right quadrant).
AholeAtheist The organisation specifically states that the left and right mean economic left/right, it states nothing about how conservative a party is. Also Act the libertarian party is placed in the opposite of libertarian on the compass and placed on authoritarian side, a complete joke
Update: NZ First has made their decision, I was wrong in my prediction that they would back the largest party (and block) and they went with Labour after Special votes evened the playing field a little with National losing 2 seats to Labour and the Greens. The Greens will give the Labour NZ First government support with a confidence and supply agreement, giving them a handful ministerial posts outside of cabinet while Winston Peters has been offered the position of Deputy Prime Minister along with some other ministerial positions for his party.
It's not that you were wrong, you just hadn't accounted for the special votes, if they were only going to have a 61 seat majority then Winston would have gone with National because 61 is too unstable, National lost two seats through by-elections last term, Labour would only need to lose 1 for the government to crumble so on those numbers your assessment was correct. However with boosted numbers Labour/Greens was the obvious pick for NZ First given their common ground, the fact that they were the Opposition together and the fact that neither party tried to destroy his party by releasing details around his superannuation payments.
Also, history was on Labour's side here. Winston Peters has played Kingmaker twice before, in 1996 and 2005. Each of those times, he backed the incumbent party for their 3rd term., then got hammered at the next election after that. (Its worth noting that its rare for a government in NZ to last less than 2 terms or more than 3.) Hence, Winston learned his lesson, and backed a new incoming government that hadn't collected up lots of baggage. I also think the alleged leaking of his pension payments by National left a sour taste in his mouth.
Qatar Dhabi State level MMP for the House would be a good way to break the partisan binds. I would refuse this, however, without a return to election of Senators by the State government though.
You didn't mention special votes, which normally swing towards the left. With 300,000 of these, it may cause a few seats from Nats to go to the Lab and green party. Ofcourse it wont be enough for majority, and kingmaker Winston Peters will be the decider, It helps increase the majority that this coallition will have.
Wow, just looked up special votes. NZ Herald is reporting that the NZEC estimates they may be up to 15% of total votes. That seems incredible! I can't find equivalent data from the AEC, but I'd have to think the number in Australia would be much lower. Do you know if there's a particular reason the number of special votes in NZ seem to be so high?
2017 just showed how much kiwis don’t understand MMP. We still vote with a FPTP mindset. Germany had an MMP election the same weekend with no party getting above ~30%. In MMP done properly there should be no such thing as a major party.
Nick Webster Germany's result - wasn't that from another "Grand Coalition" - where the major left and right parties form government together - and both losing popularity to an extent?
Hmm fair enough. I think the ABC does the same reversal at Australian elections. I'm curious as to how accurate you think the _placements_ of each of the parties that TVNZ has provided are. I haven't followed the parties particularly closely, but I did notice that the placements given by the Political Compass (at www.politicalcompass.org/ ) are quite different than TVNZ's placement -- and not just in terms of where they put the centre. For example, TVNZ has NZ First as left moderate, while PC puts them as centre authoritarian. As I said, I have no idea which, if either of them, is most accurate. Just found the disparity quite interesting.
TVNZ scores on a Progressive - Conservative axis while politicalcompass scores Authoritarian - Libertarian, that may be part of the reason. I can see merit to both. NZ First can go either way, that's their strength. It could also be caused by differences in national views For example, in NZ antiimmigration is more of a left-wing idea (coming from limiting foreign investment) while in Europe antiimmigration is more right-wing (and with a more xenophobic flavour).
I don't think you should be calling Winston's choice either way. Firstly we need to await the specials, a lot of student's who study away from their enrolled electorate will be in this count, as well as first time voters who enrolled and voted at the same time. (after the official rolls were printed.) This gives them a left-leaning demographic. Secondly it's Winston, he's not exactly the most predictable person on the planet. Personally I think he should go with the left bloc, now that's not me calling it, it's basically 50/50. Anyway, his campaign slogan was "Had enough" - does anyone who voted for this want the status quo? His policies are also more aligned with Labour, have a look at his "bottom lines" as summarised here -> www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/71xp2p/the_most_important_man_in_new_zealand_right_now/dneyf1k/ Full disclosure; Labour voter.
This comment section shows that not many people actually get the MMP system. What matters is not who gets the most seats, but who is able to make a majority coalition.
I agree, this is an awesome summary that explains succinctly and clearly our quirky little nation. I would love to share your future content if you could just improve your Maori pronunciation - hate to be nigly about an otherwise great video.
Most of my content isn't related to NZ so if you choose to stay then the Maori mispronunciation issue get's solved by default ;) (I have avoided NZ topics because of this).
You sound a bit biased towards the right, especially with the very weird diagrams you have in the top corner. Nice video explaining the voting process though, was interested about the NZ voting system after learning you guys didn't do preferential voting.
Yeah nah, nothing "centre left" about Labour. They're a centre-right + identitarian party. It's almost as odd that Labour is still called "Labour" as that the globalist party is called "National". No explanation of why NZ has an MMP system like Germany's but, unlike Germany, never conceives of the possibility of a grand coalition between the two largest and most similar parties. The main thing you've overlooked here is that "no confidence" gained the biggest vote. Of all those, including those overseas, eligible to vote by rough guesstimate about 60-65% did, meaning 35-40% chose not to surrender their democratic voice through this triennial ritual.
Dude you really should improve your Maori pronunciation. You keep adding extra syllables where there shouldn't be any i.e. Ohariu, Meteria Turei, and Marama Fox.
I wish people wouldn't be so ignorant and vote for the popular parties, TOP had some really good policies and Gareth Morgan obviously is not in it for the money because hes rich as hell and hes donated A LOT to charity
You're politics look so much nicer than America's here. At this point we would look over or not even notice the small scandal that Green Party got into. America's administration has scandals everyday, sometimes multiple.
At first I thought the y-axis was the authority measurement like some compasses do, I was really confused on why the greens were in the Stalinist area.......
Another great video really enjoyed the CGP grey/HI references. It's always interesting to see how voter competition leads to governments most people aren't happy with. For an anecdotal example, my friends agreed they would have preferred a opposition party by itself (Labour) over there party (National) and NZ first.
KIWIS where you at? i subbed to you for being a fellow kiwi and trtying to support us growing on this YT platform. I would of loved to see gareth morgan get a seat but i guess that aight happening. Can you make a video on how this term is going to effect legislation and the such, im not very politicul but id love your opinion. Keep up the good work and congrats on breaking 50k your content is great and ive been here around 10k. OUT OF CURIOUSITY WHAT PART YOU FROM
100k wont take long mate, il be here when you do. Ah pretty much a aucklander haha im from crackcity (chch) but live in nelson atm. A topic you could possibly do would be the chch earthquake i think it could be interesting considering how many earthquakes have happened since then could be a cool comparison between how we handle and how others have aswell. if you decide to use my idea id be happy to share my experience living througgh it. enjoy your day bro il be waiting for the next killer vid
OK, on second watch through of this, there was one thing that really stood out to me as odd. And it's the political manoeuvring made possible by the way MMP party lists work. You described two examples in this most recent election: Labor with the Maori seats, and ACT/National with ACT's one electorate. This is the sort of thing that seems tailor-made to _encourage_ the exact sort of strategic voting that better voting methods are designed to prevent. To take it to the extreme, a party could split itself into two separate parties: one contests only electorates (I'll call it party E), and one contests only proportional seats (party P). They coordinate and ask voters to be strategic, not only in a single seat like with the ACT, or with just the Maori seats like Labor did, but over _all_ the seats. This would surely make it look like party P was vastly underrepresented, and so they would get an enormous number of seats in the PR process. Sure, the overhang system would mean it's not _quite_ as bad as if you didn't have that, but it would still make party P+E way more powerful than the system is designed to intend. That, to me, seems like an enormous problem with MMP. Unless I'm missing something?
I tend to agree. I was actually slowly coming around to the idea of MMP (after initially being against it for quite reactionary reasons) until this video which made me realise that one big flaw. But I quite naturally find myself liking STV quite a lot. We use it in Australia for our Senate, but I also really like the Irish system of making it essentially like IRV with multiple electorates merged into one, just like John Cleese advocates for in this video. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-NSUKMa1cYHk.html Though I do think that Ireland's 3-5 seat electorates could be in some cases problematic. Ideally, I'd have thought, 4-6, maybe even up to 8, would be an ideal number to get proper proportional representation.
What your describing is called a decoy list. And it can be an issue in certain mixed systems like MMP. In an election in Italy in the 2001 several decoy lists were run, turning Italy's mixed system (called scorporo) into a de facto parallel system. Preventing the usage of decoy lists is one thing that any country adopting MMP should be cognizant of.
Jim Cullen One problem with larger constituencies is that it's harder to canvas for votes over a broad area. Already, constituencies can cover more than one local authority area (I live in County Offaly, part of the Laois-Offaly constituency), each of which can have different rules about roadside politic advertising. People tend to vote for someone from their own county.
I liked the idea they floated the last time they talked about repealing MMP- divorce the electorate seats from the party vote seats, so that both the local and national electoral moods can be properly shown on the day without ending up with an Epsom situation.
Thanks, a really good video as usual. I'd sort of worked most of it out, but trying to follow your election from Melbourne meant that I wasn't confident I understood everything, until your video explained some of the more arcane things..
great video but its worth researching how to pronounce Maori names. It's Me-ti-ri-a Tu-rei (not me-te-ri-a-ma Tu-re-a) and Ma-ra-ma Fox (not ma-ri-a-ma). For some reason you inserted a few more syllables that are there!
Great video. Would like to echo other commenters' thoughts though - you have trouble pronouncing Maori words and names in this video, and it would be nice if you took some extra care (or advice from a Maori speaker) on those.
Thanks for watching, sorry about the pronunciation, it wasn't really taught when I was in NZ and I don't have a lot of resources for making these videos. I did my best to follow what was said in the news clips.
It's a bit of a coin toss for who Winston Peters will go for- on the one hand negotiations with National are likely to be more straightforward than the Labour-Greens bloc (and Peters has a history of first talking to the largest single party); but Labour-Greens apparently have more policies in common with NZ First, and with a more disorganised and desperate bloc Peters can presumably gain more leverage in negotiation with Labour-Greens than National.
Also kudos to how you handled talking about the leaders leaving their parties, obviously Met's wasn't easy - but you didn't make it look uber messy like some media places tried to :) well respective and good video. HOPING NATIONAL DOESNT END UP WINNING... let's just hope for the special votes!
The members of Parliament are selected by % of votes across nationwide and MP who won their seats though the Elects. In priority of order Elects winners ( they get a guaranteed seat in Parliament no matter what) then % of voters of party get a share of their list of candidates of seats providing the party is over 5% of party vote threshold. Your party wins 1 Elect but fails 5% threshold only the Elect winner of your party goes to Parliament regardless of Party Ranking ( Even if your 15th on party list) and #1 in the party fails to win their Elect you still go Parliament and number #1 on the list guess what s/he will be looking for another job. If you hold as incumbent meaning you previously won that seat you go back automatically. If all party candidates fail but you somehow get 6.8% of party vote you get 8 seats and top 8 ranking members of party get a seat each 9th misses out looking for another job. If you fail to win Elect and fail to gain 5% your every party member is out of a job. Parliament can be brutal could be in there for 3 years 6 years or 9 years all depends on campaign and voters if they want you to have you job back if they don't you won't have a job a member of Parliament. National won 2023 by large margin 💙💙💪. In terms of politics Nats are center right Economy growth, strong workforce, help the wealthy and rich and Labour yeah they well rip off the rich to give the poor 😂.
If New Zealand united with Australia, our combined economy would be larger than Spain, Russia, South Korea, and even Canada (By nominal GDP). We would be a G8 nation, or a G7 nation. But New Zealand too awesome and to different to be absorbed into Australia. A fun thought experiment though would be what an fully United Oceania would be like. Could be a good topic for you, or Wendover Productions, or Wonder Why or Infographics Show to cover.
NICE format! BUT Watching from2'20 THESE VIDEOS NZ AREN'T UPDATED AS OBVIOUSLY Miss JUCINDA AD..IS STILL PRIME MINSTER Again for Anoth'ER... 3& 1/2 YEAR HORAY~♥~!!
At the end you claim that the most obvious result based on the numbers would see NZFirst go with National, but I wouldn't base it on that.. There are two more important factors.. 1. What Winston gets out of the deal. 2. The policies and political persuasions of the parties, and NZFirst is further left than Labour, so it would actually make more sense if he went with Labour and the Greens. All of this really makes it a 50/50 call, and I think anyone claiming one is more likely than the other doesn't really understand all this.
“accused labour of an $11b hole in its budget” its always so interesting hearing about budgetary policies in other countries cause here in the us we just take it as a given that we’re gonna be running at least a multi hundred billion dollar deficit no matter who’s in power (at least speaking as a zoomer, tho im aware that there were a couple years in the clinton admin that ran a surplus)
I prefer your political compass to the traditional one, since the traditional one conflates "social conservative/progressive" with "authoritarian/libertarian" which are two completely different things
Jacinda has the ideas but she cant put them into a speech that will win over voters, also labour needs to fight back and show the growing wealth inequality and poverty that has grown under national.
This all reminds me very much of the 2017 German election. Seems like New Zealand has the same voting system as Germany. Surprising from an anglophone country.
Soliloquy The switch from FPP to MMP was hijacked by the simple minded media. They promoted MMP because at least one of other options was too difficult to comprehend. Couple that with the sheep-like voting public and you get MMP. The system does give some level of proportionally but at the expense needing a list which can be stacked with party hacks.
