So who's likely to be supporting who? We blogged last week about a split in the numbers between Cunliffe and David Parker, but as they say in the classics, a week is a long time in politics, and Parker is no longer a contender. So we've given it some thought, and here's how we reckon the numbers stack up this morning (those in bold are ones to have changed alliegance):
David Cunliffe: Cunliffe, Mahuta, Dyson, Moroney, Chauvel, Little, Mackey, Curran, Prasad, Dalziel, Lees-Galloway, Horomia, Tirakatene, Fenton, Street, Wall
David Shearer: Shearer, Jones, Parker, Goff, King, Cosgrove, Ardern, Sio, R Robertson, O'Connor, Clark, Woods, Faafoi, Twyford
Undecided: Huo (if replaced by Burns, Burns will go to Camp Cunliffe), Mallard (keeping a watching brief), Hipkins (who will follow Mallard), G Robertson (considering his options)
We reckon that at the moment, it's 16 to Cunliffe, 14 to Shearer and 4 who are either waiting for others to decide, or keeping their own options open. If Brendon Burns wins Christchurch Central on specials, he will certainly defect to Camp Cunliffe after Shearer's Q&A gaffe yesterday. And Shane Jones may yet be bought; if Cunliffe needs another vote, there's the Finance spokesmanship to offer as a carrot to Jones.
This is of course completely unscientific; it's merely based on our own gut feel of where we think things are at. The final outcome is too close to call at the moment, but Cunliffe certainly enhanced his prospects at the weekend, and those who defected to Camp Shearer last week may now be reconsidering.
Let the battle continue!
UPDATE: Is Trevor Mallard doing the numbers?
7 comments:
Meanwhile the paranoid demented socialists are trying to figure out what exactly people such as yourself are actually up to.
Is it a bluff, a double bluff or a triple bluff.
They just don'tet the fact that it is one of the few games in town and political tragics such as KS are just indulging themselves.
How can anyone regard such momentous events as worthy of the disrespect that a right of center commenter might just wish to portray a guess as to what in their opinion may be the case.
Havn't yet seen the exercised suggesting it may well be a double double bluff.
Of course it completely escapes them that without a fundamental change that addresses the real reason for their dislocation from the electorate they will continue to search for a new jocky instead of calling the Hunt to collect the old nag.
"considering his options"
This is code for "trying to work out which result gets him closer to the job himself", right?
Fighting to be the tiller on a sinking ship....
Cadwallader
@ Gravedodger - you have to admit; it's more fun than a barrel of monkeys!
@ James Stephenson - precisely; Grant Robertson in particular has gone to great lengths to avoid answering the question as the whether or not he wants the leadership.
I'm content to watch the brawling.
Each contender has his good and bad points.
"Fight for knife"
neither so called teams are a collection of stars but Team Shearer have the best of a bad crop.
PLEASE choose Cunliffe
Post a Comment