Subverting the democratic will of voters?

Is telling voters who they should vote for ‘subverting the democratic will of voters’? Wellington mayoral candidate Nick Leggett thinks so, or he thinks that saying so will attract a bit of attention and a few votes.

All candidates in this election must respect the democratic will of the voters. Tactics like this must not be tolerated.

ctevne6vyaa57xe

I thought it was fairly normal for candidates and campaign teams to try and tell voters who to vote for and how to vote.

If voters are being deliberately misled then there could be cause to grizzle, but I’m not sure that’s the case here.

I’m not even sure what “democratic will of voters” is supposed to mean.

Ethics in election campaigns? That’s a bit of an ask.

What about owning Leggett’s “my supporters”? Is it a subversion of democracy to tell them how to vote? Or is it just other people telling them?

More on this…

Pete, the critical distinction is between advising on ranking and falsely claiming a vote for preferred candidate is wasted.

Don’t forget she’s already sending emails citing staffer-stacked Stuff polls as reason voting for Nick is wasted

cte3qqvuaaadleq

The poll she refers to is a Stuff online poll.

I am not a fan of scientifically meaningless online surveys as a means to eliminate ur opponent.

Did 12 years and countless campaigns under pref voting in Oz. Saw stuff to make your hair curl. Never this.

Worth noting Jo ad links to a doctored front page. Not really the paragon of ethical campaigning.

Sounds like things are getting tense in the Wellington contest.

Unlike Auckland and Christchurch, Wellington seems to be a very close run contest with second and third preference votes being perhaps crucal.

Phil Quin says that a recent online poll has been taken down “due to excessive late-night vote-bombing”.

He has provided an earlier poll:

ctfinnmuiaagsy4

Online polls are crap (aka very unreliable as they are non -representative, self selecting and easily manipulated), so basing any campaign on these is highly questionable.

I don’t think Leggett came across very well with his tweet bleat, but it looks like he has good cause to be grumpy with the “Go Jo” campaign.

Leave a comment

8 Comments

  1. Gezza

     /  24th September 2016

    God, I dunno PK. I can’t make up my mind. Someone from Justin’s lot rang me up at home a couple of weeks ago and told me all about Justin’s plans for growing Wellington’s economy and jobs, and told me the other candidates have all *got nothing*❗️

    What do you reckon? Don’t think I’ll be voting for the cougar. Reckon it’s probably down to Oleggett & Lester. Ma reckons Nick’s in front, but she thinks Jack Tame’s good on Newstalk ZB, so, I dunno.

    Who do you reckon? But not Fran.

    Reply
    • Yeh Gezza, I am also confused. I have read most of the bullshit sent out to the candidates but what worries me is that I am unable to identify those whose political affiliation is not apparent. Me I will vote for rational, commonsense people who are a bit younger and have no political ties – but hell, who can idenify them?

      Reply
      • In the end, I voted for the candidate who had 0% support on the basis that whomever is selected will have to wear the next 3 years criticism so I have saved one person that fate!

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  26th September 2016

          So far as I know, none of them is handy with an angle grinder, which would quite probably swing it for me. 🆗

          Reply
  2. Pete Kane

     /  26th September 2016

    I missed this. Must be the latest ‘meaningless’ poll. It is tight though. There won’t be great levels of redistribution before getting to that first three. One would assume Young’s would go to Bill’s sister in law, but a lot of different relationships in this town. Certainly won’t be a left right divide entirely. You would think without a backed ‘green establishment’ candidate, Lester would take it?

    Reply
    • Gezza

       /  26th September 2016

      Well, sounds like should, Pete. According to his telephone campaigner the others have *got nothing*. He seemed to think he was in the know.

      Reply
  3. Pete Kane

     /  26th September 2016

    Actually, despite polling, Ritchie and Foster have a very long term name recognition. I mean, again you guess, Foster for the sister in law and Ritchie for Lester?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s