This formula is the more commonly/modern/comparative used way of measuring voter turnout (as opposed to just votes as a proportion of those *enrolled*).

Bryce

Advance votes, specials votes done before election day?

Could be interesting yet although I see my voting pattern was the majority one

I understand your formula, however two or three Auckland seats must surely be too close to call.

Advance votes were a mix of advance Ordinary Votes, and advance Special Votes.

E.g. for polling places in downtown Wellington you could cast an ordinary vote for Wellington Central, Hutt South, Rimutaka, Ohariu, Mana, Rongotai or Te Tai Tonga (catering for all?

It?s a function of how the special votes are recorded. There aren?t any wholly Maori Polling Places. Each Polling Place will also have at least one General?

Have just realised, the fact that there were 3,717 special votes received at polling places within Christchurch Central doesn't mean that there are 3717 votes to be split between candidates in that electorate.

Some of them will be – they'll be Special Votes issued to?

I don't think you have to be either from Christchurch or connected to the Deaf community to really hope this happens. Couldn't be?

I put that to Simon Power recently but sadly he didn't share my view.

Are we really such an ADHD culture that we can't wait? Yeah, I'm sure there a?

If you enrol to vote in advance, you get sent a voting card and can go along, show it at any polling station in NZ and vote. If you don't?

does seem like a win-win prospect :)

If you know Mojo, you want it even more, whatever community (I'm neither of the above)

I'm not sure what scenario you're talking about, but unless it is Katene winning Te Tai Tonga, then the number of seats is 121.

It's also to allow time for overseas votes to be returned ... Kiwis voting in London,?

I think it's great that all our votes get physically counted, under scrutiny, twice! And can be counted again if there's any doubt.

Yup – and it's also worth remembering that New Zealand does things like this because our electoral system is internationally respected and the results taken seriously. Getting the basics of a credible election result done right rather than done?

Yes you're correct – the highest number of special votes within any electorate are likely to be for that electorate – for the unpublished roll, and late enrolments,?

124 MPs = 62 v 62.
120 MPs = 61 v 59.
116 MPs = 58 v 58.

Bullshit, eh. That's why we need preferences on the party vote, stop the left-right rounding errors on these close?

They have tended to get more than their overall general vote share, haven't they? Especially from overseas voters.

Too?

It just doesn't feel like?

it's not. many media still haven't adjusted to MMP rather than FPP.

National + ACT + Dunne = 64/122

2011 (if Greens take one off National with the Special votes):

National + Banks + Dunne = 61/121

majority reduced from six to one.
the media duopoly?s headline writers seem to have had too much gin on the night.

ur, really really?

With MMP and the rise of the Greens I think everyone has to lose the mindset that elections are a 2-horse race.

Was it this one?

You're probably also thinking?

If you enrolled a month ago – 26 October – you would have just missed out, as the rolls were printed on 25 October.

I?

Only if they voted at a diplomatic post or posted their votes to their local diplomatic post (for?

What about the 1997 Winchester election where a rerun was ordered after an electoral petition?

It has started already: we will be paying our bills to Chinese and Indian power companies, we were told on morning radio. Good grief.

Only as long as he doesn?t get run over by a bus during the next three years, because in that case he morphs back into Don Brash as far as the system is?

If Banks expires in office (and I take cheer from the mortality stats for fat old men) there would be a by-election. If the National candidate wins, there'll be?

Well, not yet. Maybe the Electoral Commission will recommend a change!

I'm thinking about whether there should be one in respect of list MPs who contest by-elections. I'm still forming my view,?

Rachel, a belated thanks for this information, much appreciated.

Also, thanks to all the other clearly well informed and interesting comments on?

You are indeed correct. Silly me forgetting about the threshold after all that.

Ugh. I don?t. It?s a personal and public health disaster. Interesting question, but not one I look forward to. Peachey?s death didn?t effect things because it was within 6 (?) months of a general election, right?

What's the reasoning? It seems to me to be the equivalent of banning list MPs from contesting?

No word on whether a Tardis was involved.

Party A held seat, party A list MP wins seat: no net change on electorate or list
Party A held seat, party B list MP wins seat: +1 electorate MP for A, no net change on list

It seems (at?

Some people actually want to ban that completely. I'm positing a slightly less drastic alternative.

Quite – and in a crazy idea, how about leaving voters to decide? If a party duly selects?

Same effect in reality though. What political party is going to let someone run off the list to an electoral by-election, if it means they lose a seat in the house?

One that wants to win it :-)

One that doesn't want Judith Tizard or Paul Quinn to return from the list?

No.

At least, that was my theory in the Mana By-election. People were arguing that MPs should be banned from running in?

If they didn't like that, they could have voted for another candidate. If the Labour?