Can Matt Nippert count?


Herald reporter Matt Nippert seems to be completely unable to count. He makes the following statement.

Mr Nash won the Napier seat off National, in part helped by the Conservative Party’s Garth McVicar splitting the vote, and was talked about as a possible candidate to replace David Cunliffe as party leader.

So Matt Nippert hasn?t done any analysis on the seat of Napier. None at all, or he wouldn?t make this silly statement. Nash won and would have won regardless of whether McVicar ran.?

Maybe he can?t read either. To make things easy for him here is the analysis provided by Whaleoil that shows this.

by Cameron Slater on September 22, 2014 at 9:00am

Commenters seem unable to see the obvious.

So here are the numbers in Napier.

Nash 14041
Walford 10308
McVicar 7135
Nash Margin 3733
McVicar ? Margin 3402
Half of above 1701
Total Walford needed to win 5434

For Walford to win he had to win back Nash?s 3733 margin to start?with.

So take that off McVicar?s vote, and you get 3402. Walford had to win half of this to beat Nash by one vote or 1701. So 5434 votes in total.

Nash on the other hand only had to win 1701 out of McVicars 7135 votes to stay ahead.

Still Nippert isn?t the only commentator who can?t count. That post was about Duncan Garner not being able to count either.

So Stuart Nash won Napier because the conservatives split the vote.

Did you actually look at the results Duncan? Or were you too busy?gobbing off and not actually listening and analysing.

Here is?the analysis?Duncan. I?m posting it for you so you can continue with the wine, women and song rather than having to do any actual thinking. It?s ok I?m used to having to provide real analysis when others drop the ball.