Why vote for Labour-Lite when it's Labour you don't like.

Kate Hawkesby makes no sense 

Yes, I know, picking on Kate Hawkesby is low-hanging fruit. But there is a serious point to be made. Hawkesby writes:

Based on latest polling, a coalition of Labour, Greens and Te Pati Maori gets 45 percent of the seats in Parliament, even though 66 percent of voters think the country is going in the wrong direction.
    Head scratch.
    A coalition of National and Act, which would arguably change the direction of this country which two thirds of voters think is heading in the wrong direction, on latest polling has only 50.8 percent of the seats.
    This makes no sense.

If you think about it for only a minute (longer head scratch, perhaps) it actually makes perfect sense.

Two-thirds of those polled agree that the country is going in the wrong direction. Yet only half of those polled profess to be voting for a change of government. 

Which suggests perhaps that a fairly large proportion think that a government led by Christopher Luxon doesn't represent any kind of fundamental change of direction at all. 

And unless he's been lying to the electorate, it doesn't.

The response then, so unfathomable to la Hawkesby, actually makes perfect sense: Why vote for Labour-Lite when it's Labour you don't like.