Stuff poll of polls

Perhaps in ,liwu of doing any polling themselves stuff has started a ‘poll of polls’ that they say “uses a different method then others”.

New Zealand election 2017: Poll of polls shows tight race

Most of our elections since MMP came in in 1996 have potentially been tight races.

In consultation with Massey University, we have devised a new method for measuring polling. The Stuff poll of polls differs from others by giving weight to each poll based on how recent it is. We do not use internal party polling.

I thought that was a common method with poll of polls.

So what does it show?

Until the latest Roy Morgan poll earlier this month, National would have held power without the need for any new coalition partners – just.

But National fell back slightly in that poll, dragging its support down to 46 per cent, which would translate into 56 seats in Parliament.

National could rely on another four seats from the Maori Party, ACT and UnitedFuture assuming the leaders of those parties hold on to their electorate seats – Te Ururoa Flavell in Waiariki, David Seymour in Epsom and Peter Dunne in Ohariu.

Flavell would bring another MP into Parliament for the Maori Party on current support.

That would give a National-led group of 60 MPs – an agonising one seat short of a majority in a 121-seat Parliament (there would be an overhang of one seat).

Then what? You guessed it, Winston Peters and NZ First hold the balance of power.

That doesn’t tell us much that we don’t already know.

It is fairly vague assumptions based on a number of past poll results.

And with only three polls being run now, and not very frequently, there isn’t a lot to collate.

What it doesn’t do is predict what voters will decide over the next couple of months, and what parties will decide once they get to coalition negotiation time.

Previous Post


  1. Gezza

     /  July 29, 2017

    I’ll look at it when it comes out. I’m sorry we don’t have weekly polling in NZ. Really fascinated with the US RealClearPolitics efforts to constantly track candidates’ chances.

    This one will be as patchy & infrequent as the others, so won’t add much except argument about its relevance & accuracy, I imagine.

  2. Kitty Catkin

     /  August 11, 2017

    Different than ? Ouch.