Wednesday, June 01, 2005

NBR's Flawed Analysis

The National Business Review's Blog had a post here on the Epsom electorate seat. After saying that Worth's list place will mean Epsom voters may decide they can vote for Hide after all - perhaps meaning Hide brings more MPs with him, they predict he can win:

"[T]he relatively narrow margins by which Rodney has failed to gain the seat suggest only a small swing - on the back of a "Worth is safe" campaign - will be required for Rodney to win Epsom at the next election."
This is completely wrong. The official Epsom results show that Hide, in 2002, placed 3rd in the electorate. From my calculations here are the main four candidates:

Richard Worth - 42%
Di Nash - 24%
Rodney Hide - 22%
Keith Locke - 6%

Now, presuming that Labour and the rest gobbled up a similar share and divided it similarly, there would need to be at least a 10% swing towards Hide from Worth for him to win. It's not impossible, but it's not the "small swing" they suggest is required.


Blogger Aaron Bhatnagar said...

To be fair on Rodney, he deliberately sought the party vote in 2002 - the personal vote he got was without any overt campaigning.

1:38 PM  
Blogger carnifex senatoris said...

Absolutely agree - and I think (need to check) that he did ay better in 1999. But as the past has shown us in other seats (Ohariu-Belmont, Wellington Central), it's hard to rebuild support in a seat that wasn't seriously contested the previous election.

9:35 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home