{"id":321608,"date":"2026-03-10T01:31:08","date_gmt":"2026-03-10T01:31:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/321608\/"},"modified":"2026-03-10T01:31:08","modified_gmt":"2026-03-10T01:31:08","slug":"the-five-tribes-kiwi-voters-fall-into-which-one-are-you-and-how-will-politicians-battle-for-your-vote","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/321608\/","title":{"rendered":"The five tribes Kiwi voters fall into: Which one are you \u2013 and how will politicians battle for your vote?"},"content":{"rendered":"

They used to call your landline in the middle of dinner, back when most of us had landlines. Now, pollsters scrutinise us in more complex ways.<\/p>\n

\n David Farrar and David Talbot are two of the most influential figures in New Zealand politics: they\u2019re the pollsters for the major political
\n parties, as well as various other clients. Farrar worked in Parliament before setting up his own firm in 2004. John Key once described him as \u201cthe best pollster in New Zealand\u201d. Talbot also worked in Parliament and served as pollster and strategist to Jacinda Ardern and Chris Hipkins before establishing Talbot Mills Research.\n <\/p>\n

Farrar\u2019s company, Curia, still calls landlines: they account for 10-15% of his responses. The rest of the data collection happens via online panels and cellphone surveys. \u201cThere are quite a lot of pensioners in their retirement homes who still make sure they get out and vote every three years,\u201d and they\u2019re hard to find online. The panels draw their respondents from pools of tens of thousands of voters, demographically weighted. Mobile phones capture 40- to 60-year-olds.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s not as purely random as 40 years ago,\u201d Farrar says. \u201cEveryone was at home in the evening, everyone had a landline, everyone answered the phone.\u201d <\/p>\n

Now, pollsters build a representative picture from fragments, weighting for age, gender, region, sometimes previous party vote \u2013 itself unreliable. <\/p>\n

\"ImageImage \/ Listener Illustration<\/p>\n

\u201cWhen a party becomes unpopular, you get fewer people saying they voted for that party. There have been times in the past you just couldn\u2019t find a Winston [Peters] voter.\u201d<\/p>\n

To screen out people who aren\u2019t taking the poll seriously, he includes trap questions. His recent favourite: \u201cDo you have a current licence to pilot a space shuttle?\u201d About 4% say yes.<\/p>\n

Between them, Talbot and Farrar have briefed every prime minister since Helen Clark. Both agree that the electorate has become harder to read.<\/p>\n

The Listener met Talbot on one of Wellington\u2019s all-too-rare great days, sitting in the sun in Midland Park. (Chris Hipkins\u2019 fianc\u00e9e waved to him as she walked past.) In his focus groups, almost nobody reads a daily paper, even online. Almost nobody watches the six o\u2019clock news. \u201cIt\u2019s not just that the media market has moved somewhere else,\u201d he says, \u201cit\u2019s that it\u2019s contracted.\u201d<\/p>\n

The institutions that once gave voters a shared understanding of politics \u2013 newspapers, churches, unions \u2013 are weaker than they were. Voters still hold opinions, but they\u2019ve lost the common frame that used to organise them.<\/p>\n

Farrar sees the same thing from his side. \u201cPeople used to be more tribal,\u201d he says. \u201cYou would hear, \u2018I\u2019m a National voter,\u2019 \u2018I\u2019m a Labour voter.\u2019 Husbands and wives often voted the same way, and that\u2019s definitely no longer the case.\u201d<\/p>\n

The baseline used to be roughly 40% Labour, 40% National, 20% up for grabs. \u201cWe\u2019ve had Labour down to 25%, National down to 21%. The institutional loyalty is a lot lower than in the past. It\u2019s far more fluid.\u201d<\/p>\n

Whose side are you on?<\/p>\n

In 1987, Labour nearly won Remuera. For its then-leader David Lange, this rang alarm bells. \u201cThat was an apprehension on my part, that we had actually abandoned our constituency,\u201d he later recalled. \u201cAnd that struck me as being a dangerous flirtation, and an act of treachery to the people we were born to represent.\u201d <\/p>\n

That same year, academics Jack Vowles, now of Victoria University of Wellington, and the University of Auckland\u2019s Peter Aimer undertook the first systematic survey of the New Zealand electorate. They asked a sample of voters what their values were, which party they supported and why, interrogating the questions Lange fretted over \u2013 Do you believe having a strong leader in government is good for New Zealand even if the leader bends the rules to get things done? Should references to the Treaty of Waitangi be removed from the law? Is abortion always wrong? \u2013 questioning who the parties sought to represent, and whether they really did so.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

After the 1990 election, they expanded their work and the survey has followed every election since then. The result is a 36-year body of research holding up a political mirror to the nation, tracking the impacts of MMP, recessions, pandemics, the rise of Helen Clark, John Key, Jacinda Ardern, the many falls and miraculous returns of Winston Peters. It tells the same story Farrar and Talbot see in their own research: the old loyalties \u2013 Labour for the working class, National for farmers and business owners \u2013 are breaking down or have already broken.<\/p>\n

The Listener took the responses to 40 questions about values, trust and political interest from the 2023 Electoral Survey and identified groups that gave similar answers to each other, and who shared similar levels of wealth, age and education. These are the tribes that occupy the political landscape of modern New Zealand.<\/p>\n

Today, both the left and the right are divided by economic class. Left-wing political parties are run by \u201cEducated Progressives\u201d: upper-middle class professionals with advanced degrees who own their own homes, unlike the \u201cPrecarious Left\u201d, who are disproportionately young, M\u0101ori and Pasifika, female, earning below average incomes. The \u201cEstablishment Right\u201d are wealthy property owners, less educated but older. Beneath them sit the \u201cAlienated Conservatives\u201d: also older, predominantly male, but far less likely to own property or have an income in the top bracket. <\/p>\n

Left and right both compete for a large centrist tribe, \u201cMiddle New Zealand\u201d. It makes up 26% of the electorate and is the hardest group to characterise because its defining feature is the absence of strong positions. This group decides elections by voting for whoever seems competent.<\/p>\n

On the left<\/p>\n

In 2023, the most polarising topic in New Zealand politics was the Treaty of Waitangi. It wasn\u2019t the most important issue to most voters \u2013 that would be the economy, followed by the cost of living. But it was the strongest indicator of which side of the political divide you cast your vote. Where you stood on the treaty connected to where you stood on almost everything else: redistribution, climate, unions, gender equity \u2026<\/p>\n

Back in 1990, the year of the first large-scale electoral survey, the majority of Labour voters were members of the traditional working class, an identity that\u2019s largely vanished from New Zealand politics. They were economically left-wing, pro-union, pro-redistribution of wealth and in favour of a strong public health system, but sceptical of the treaty and opposed to M\u0101ori having more voice in how the country was run. <\/p>\n

Labour\u2019s leader that year was Mike Moore, who left school at 14 to become a meat worker and a union delegate. By 1993, the party was led by Helen Clark, a political science lecturer \u2013 an archetypal Educated Progressive whose tribe would come to dominate left-wing politics.<\/p>\n

The archetypal Educated Progressive is a woman who votes Labour and Green. She works in health policy or law or runs a non-government organisation in T\u0101maki Makaurau. She owns her home. She\u2019s not wealthy by the standards of the leafy suburb she lives in, but not precarious, either. <\/p>\n

\"EducatedEducated progressives: Highly qualified, though not wealthy, professionals who support co-governance, wealth redistribution and climate change policies. Believe their vote counts. Image \/ Anthony Ellison<\/p>\n

She comprises 21% of the electorate, is three times more likely to hold a postgraduate degree, and is the most politically engaged tribe in the dataset. She trusts institutions. She votes. She has never seriously worried that a person like her has no say. She supports co-governance, wealth redistribution, stronger climate policy and union rights.<\/p>\n

But she works in the sectors that grow when the government grows \u2013 healthcare administration, tertiary education, law, the public service, consultancies \u2013 and her vision for a larger state inevitably means more high-income jobs for people with advanced degrees. Her interests and her ideals are conveniently aligned.<\/p>\n

\"PrecariousPrecarious Left: Qualifications haven\u2019t translated into security: only 11% own their own homes. Cynical. Image \/ Anthony Ellison<\/p>\n

The Precarious Left is a woman who votes Labour, too, when she votes. She\u2019s younger \u2013 average age 42, the youngest tribe \u2013 and she is more likely to be M\u0101ori or Pasifika, more likely to be raising kids alone, more likely to rent. She works in early childhood education or aged care or as a community health worker: essential jobs that don\u2019t pay enough for a deposit on a house in a city where she could find work. Only 11% of her tribe own their home outright. Another 11% are in social housing.<\/p>\n

She is not uneducated \u2013 university rates are average, vocational qualifications above average \u2013 but her qualifications haven\u2019t translated into security. She needs public healthcare, public transport, welfare benefits and childcare subsidies. She interacts with the state as a client and a low-paid employee, and her experience of it is one of failure and unresponsiveness.<\/p>\n

She is the most cynical tribe in the dataset. She strongly agrees that government is run by big interests, that MPs are out of touch, that a person like her has no say. She depends on the institutions the Educated Progressive trusts \u2013 and she doesn\u2019t trust them at all. She scores lowest of any tribe in her confidence that she can effect political change.<\/p>\n

On the right<\/p>\n

In 1990, National was led by Jim Bolger, who left school at 15 to work on the family dairy farm. In 2023, the party was led by Christopher Luxon, an independently wealthy former corporate executive with a master\u2019s degree in commerce \u2013 the epitome of the Establishment Right.<\/p>\n

This voter was already recognisable during Bolger\u2019s day: male, highest income, most opposed to redistribution, most enthusiastic about private healthcare. Two-thirds of his tribe voted National then; two-thirds vote National now. He is the most stable tribe in the dataset \u2013 he decides his vote early and doesn\u2019t change his mind.<\/p>\n

Over a quarter of his tribe earn in the top income bracket. More than half own their home outright. Barely anyone rents. He is overwhelmingly P\u0101keh\u0101 \u2013 he\u2019d prefer to be labelled New Zealand European \u2013 overwhelmingly partnered, and at an average age of 56, the oldest cohort.<\/p>\n

\"EstablishmentEstablishment Right: High-income earning, mainly Pakeha and older males, they oppose co-governance and wealth redistribution. Image \/ Anthony Ellison<\/p>\n

His conservatism is straightforwardly material: he opposes wealth redistribution because he\u2019d be redistributed from, and opposes co-governance because the current system has served him well. He has the strongest feelings about co-governance of any tribe in the dataset. Like the Educated Progressive, he has a high sense of his own political efficacy. She runs nearly everything; he owns nearly everything. Both are confident they can change things to suit themselves.<\/p>\n

In 1990, National\u2019s core supporter was the Social Conservative: male, religious, middle-income, middle-class, and home ownership rates were at 78%. He trusted politicians and participated enthusiastically in the democratic process. He was moderate on the economy but conservative on social issues \u2013 pro-nuclear ship visits and US defence ties, opposed to gay rights and women\u2019s equality.<\/p>\n

\"AlienatedAlienated Conservative: Older, mainly male and less wealthy, they distrust the system and are less likely to vote. Image \/ Anthony Ellison<\/p>\n

His successor, 33 years later, is the Alienated Conservative, and almost everything about him has changed except the way he votes. The Alienated Conservative is older, predominantly male, but looks nothing like the Establishment Right voter. He is far less likely to own property or earn in the top bracket \u2013 home ownership has fallen to 30%, and his non-voting rate has quadrupled.<\/p>\n

He is the most likely tribe to have been born overseas \u2013 only 65% are New Zealand-born. He might run a small contracting firm in the outer suburbs, or drive trucks or work a trade he brought with him from South Africa or the UK. And he distrusts everything: Parliament, government, the courts. He strongly agrees MPs are out of touch, that big interests run the government, that politicians don\u2019t care what people like him think.<\/p>\n

He is, in a sense, the mirror image of the Precarious Left \u2013 modest income, low trust, a strong feeling that the system doesn\u2019t work for people like him \u2013 but where she turns left, he turns right. In 2023, he was twice as supportive of New Zealand First as any other tribe. Winston Peters speaks to his combination of social conservatism, economic modesty and disaffection in a way Christopher Luxon and David Seymour cannot.<\/p>\n

The centre holds \u2013 for now<\/p>\n

Middle New Zealand is the largest tribe \u2013 26% of voters in 2023 \u2013 and the hardest to characterise because its defining feature is the absence of strong positions. Average age, average income, average education. On the many values that define the five tribes, these voters sit close to the centre on almost everything: economic policy, social values, the treaty and co-governance.<\/p>\n

\"MiddleMiddle New Zealand: Lacking in strong opinions, they are where elections are won and lost. Image \/ Anthony Ellison<\/p>\n

There is one exception: on institutional trust they are the most trusting group in the country. They trust Parliament, the government, the courts and police. They trust National and Labour in roughly equal measure. They disagree with statements that politicians don\u2019t care, that MPs are out of touch, that a person like them has no say. The system has worked for them: they own their homes, they have stable incomes, they live in suburbs where the schools are decent and the police come when you call.<\/p>\n

In 2020, 42% of them voted Labour. In 2023, they went 39% National. They don\u2019t hate either major party, they just vote for whoever seems competent. <\/p>\n

Both Labour and National understand this is where elections are won and lost. It explains why leaders compete on managerial competence rather than ideology, and why both sides retreat from their base when the polls tighten. <\/p>\n

Middle New Zealand doesn\u2019t want a revolution. They want things to be slightly better than last year.<\/p>\n

Ng\u0101 iwi e rua (two tribes)<\/p>\n

Victoria University associate professor Lara Greaves studies M\u0101ori political behaviour. In 2019, she ran a representative survey of young M\u0101ori that included the statement \u201cI am proud to be M\u0101ori.\u201d The result wasn\u2019t statistically significant because almost everyone agreed. \u201cThere\u2019s just this wave of M\u0101ori, demographically and attitudinally, that are proud.\u201d<\/p>\n

Greaves calls them the k\u014dhanga generation, shaped by the M\u0101ori language revitalisation movement even if they never attended k\u014dhanga reo themselves. The median age for M\u0101ori is around 27, and this younger cohort is the most left-wing group in the entire dataset. Young M\u0101ori women sit furthest left of anyone. They support co-governance, back the treaty settlement process, and vote Labour or Green or Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori.<\/p>\n

But roughly a third of self-identified M\u0101ori in the 2023 study place themselves on the centre right. They\u2019re older \u2013 average age 47 \u2013 majority male, and they look a lot like the Alienated Conservatives: profoundly disengaged from politics. The latter\u2019s largest \u201cparty\u201d in 2023 is non-vote, at 32%. Those who do turn out go National (26%), Labour (14%), NZ First (10%). Almost none vote Green or Te P\u0101ti M\u0101ori.<\/p>\n

Greaves traces this back to a specific economic catastrophe. The closure of freezing works and meatpacking plants in the 1980s devastated M\u0101ori communities that had built their working lives around those industries. The men who survived Rogernomics didn\u2019t become progressives. They became pragmatists, oriented toward local development, jobs, infrastructure, the politics of Shane Jones and New Zealand First, rather than the treaty-centric activism of their children and grandchildren.<\/p>\n

Some grew up concealing their ethnicity because being M\u0101ori carried stigma. The k\u014dhanga generation\u2019s pride is not something they all share. And the 32% who don\u2019t vote at all point to something neither left nor right has solved: a constituency that doesn\u2019t recognise itself in any party on offer.<\/p>\n

In 2023, more than 1000 people registered on the M\u0101ori electoral roll cast their party vote for Act, but there\u2019s no Tangata Seymour tribe in the dataset. That number of votes is too small to be captured by a survey. The study sees the highways and rivers but can\u2019t capture the crooked trails and errant streams of New Zealand\u2019s electorate. And the tribes themselves are porous, with values and beliefs changing as voters pass the stages of their age and youth.<\/p>\n

Shifting currents<\/p>\n

There\u2019s a warning in the long-term trends. Back in 1990, the Social Conservatives trusted our politicians, parties and institutions. Now, their successors are largely locked out of the housing market, and in 2023, their incidence of non-voting quadrupled to 20%. They became the Alienated Conservatives. The material foundation of their confidence in the political system eroded and their faith went with it.<\/p>\n

Farrar notes the rightward drift of ageing is weakening. \u201cThere is still some shift,\u201d he says, \u201cbut not as big as there used to be.\u201d The 40- to 60-year-olds are up for grabs, more centrist than their parents were at the same age. \u201cThey\u2019re the ones actually with kids in the health and education systems trying to make ends meet.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"ImageImage \/ Listener Illustration<\/p>\n

The lifecycle mechanism that once reliably created conservative voters \u2013 get a mortgage, get kids, get conservative \u2013 requires people to actually get mortgages. If the home-ownership rate among the young keeps falling, the constituency for right-wing politics contracts with it.<\/p>\n

Farrar says policies matter less than they used to. \u201cIssues have quite a big influence. If you can brand your party with an issue, then the policies don\u2019t matter that much.\u201d<\/p>\n

Talbot draws the same conclusion from the other direction. \u201cEvery election, every society, every moment is a bit different. But a Tory pollster \u2013 this is one of my favourite lines in politics \u2013 has this quote, and he says, \u2018If the election is an exam, it\u2019s the voters who set the question. Parties who choose to answer a different question will be marked accordingly.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

The implication is that the direction of causality runs upward: voters determine what matters, and parties that try to reframe the question usually fail.<\/p>\n

In the dying days of first-past-the-post elections, David Lange worried his party was abandoning its constituency. Now, 30 years into MMP, both major parties face a harder problem: they each have two constituencies with overlapping values but different lives and different needs \u2013 and victory depends on winning a ruthlessly pragmatic third group, largely indifferent to values, who just want competent government.<\/p>\n

\u201cI see myself as bringing the voice of all of those tribes into the decision-making process,\u201d Talbot says. \u201cIt\u2019s getting harder.\u201d <\/p>\n

\"AcrossAcross four of the five tribes, solid majorities want immigration either increased or kept where it is. Photo \/ Getty Images<\/p>\n

Immigration is tearing apart conventional political parties across the Anglosphere and Europe. Anti-migrant sentiment helped drive Brexit, fuelled Trump\u2019s rise, and reshaped Australian politics. New Zealand has one of the highest inward migration rates per capita in the OECD \u2013 and the issue barely registers. Only 0.4% of respondents named it as the most important problem facing the country.<\/p>\n

Across four of the five tribes, solid majorities want immigration either increased or kept where it is. The exception is the Alienated Conservatives, where more than half want numbers reduced. This might seem paradoxical \u2013 it\u2019s the tribe with the most migrants. But it\u2019s a familiar pattern internationally: first-generation immigrants who arrived through skilled or investment pathways often want to pull the ladder up behind them.<\/p>\n

M\u0101ori voters are also more sceptical of immigration than you\u2019d expect given their overall leftward lean \u2013 and the most anti-immigration group in the entire dataset are M\u0101ori in the Alienated Conservative tribe. This too has parallels elsewhere: many indigenous peoples see large-scale migration as colonisation continued by other means.<\/p>\n

More striking still, New Zealand moved sharply pro-immigration during exactly the period its peer nations were lurching the other way. The share wanting immigration nearly doubled between 2017 and 2023, possibly because Covid border closures made the costs of less migration painfully concrete.<\/p>\n

The one party that has tried to make immigration a wedge issue is New Zealand First. Its voters are far more anti-immigration than any other party\u2019s supporters. But there\u2019s a catch: support for NZ First rises with migration numbers only when the party is in opposition. In government, the issue loses its charge.<\/p>\n

Save<\/a>Share this article<\/p>\n

Reminder, this is a Premium article and requires a subscription to read.<\/p>\n

Copy LinkEmailFacebookTwitter\/XLinkedInReddit<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"They used to call your landline in the middle of dinner, back when most of us had landlines.…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":321609,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[95,192,1863,5837,3043,5199,2946,3592,1342,2082,221,296,194,28488,173694,10110,130,3025,111,43,139,425,69,5270,18481,173695,173696,223,8229,173693,13797,5905,24687,1955,1316,5977,1533,197,1959],"class_list":{"0":"post-321608","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-new-zealand","8":"tag-and","9":"tag-are","10":"tag-back","11":"tag-battle","12":"tag-call","13":"tag-complex","14":"tag-dinner","15":"tag-fall","16":"tag-five","17":"tag-for","18":"tag-how","19":"tag-into","20":"tag-kiwi","21":"tag-landline","22":"tag-landlines","23":"tag-middle","24":"tag-more","25":"tag-most","26":"tag-new-zealand","27":"tag-news","28":"tag-newzealand","29":"tag-now","30":"tag-nz","31":"tag-one","32":"tag-politicians","33":"tag-pollsters","34":"tag-scrutinise","35":"tag-the","36":"tag-they","37":"tag-tribes","38":"tag-used","39":"tag-vote","40":"tag-voters","41":"tag-ways","42":"tag-when","43":"tag-which","44":"tag-will","45":"tag-you","46":"tag-your"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/321608","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=321608"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/321608\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/321609"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=321608"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=321608"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/nz\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=321608"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}