• Full Story

Kim Dotcom more popular than John Banks - poll

Email
Print

Kiwis choose Dotcom over Banks

3News NZ

John Banks and Kim Dotcom

John Banks and Kim Dotcom

New Zealanders are fairly evenly divided in their opinion of internet millionaire Kim Dotcom but they hold him in higher regard than his former beneficiary, ACT leader John Banks, according to a new survey.

UMR Research's Omnibus survey released on Thursday shows 38 percent of New Zealanders have favourable opinions of Dotcom, while 36 percent view him unfavourably, 24 percent have no opinion of him and two percent claim never to have heard of him.

Just 14 percent of New Zealanders view Mr Banks favourably, with 71 percent viewing him unfavourably. Thirteen percent are unsure and two percent again say they have never heard of him.

"Dotcom is clearly more popular than Banks even in Banks' home area of Auckland," UMR said in a statement.

"Forty-three percent of Aucklanders have favourable opinions of Kim Dotcom, while 17 percent of Aucklanders view John Banks favourably."

Dotcom, who is opposing extradition to the United States to face internet piracy and money laundering charges, made a $50,000 donation to Mr Banks' Auckland mayoral campaign in 2010 - which Mr Banks declared as anonymous in his campaign returns.

But their relationship soured earlier this year when Mr Banks said he could not recall the donation and that he hardly knew Dotcom.

The survey of 750 New Zealand adults was conducted from September 27 to October 2.
NZN

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

13/10/2012 11:25:20 p.m.

dennis wrote:

True policy does not need "contributions" t.co/1rEJdXoj

13/10/2012 10:02:21 p.m.

jan.. wrote:

John Banks is full of crabs written all over his forehead by denying that he ask Dotcom for a donation the night' the only night that Dotcom held a big party at his home but when Banks refuses to help Dotcom while in the Remand and that when things turned upside down. Dotocom download his business through Hongkong but when the Hollywood Film Industries found out that Dotcom make billions from it source and that when things turned nasty.. Loads of people download free movies from the advertisement on the net. Dotcom is only a small fry compared with the Hollwod filming industry so I honestly don't see any fuzz. Look the Hongkong people are not even bothered but the American CIA and the FBI must probably wanted their cut so as Banks and John Key the backhanders. Dotcom comes Germany and his business took place through Hongkong and not America. Its almost three years or could be more that Dotcom been abused by it system and more or less Dotcom has paid for whatever crime that he commits.

12/10/2012 4:38:36 p.m.

dennis wrote:

Jan Ellen. Kim Dotcom is not from America. The US has this new "Alter Ego" International Law. What it means is that when Finland decides Google violates their legislation they can "extradite" Larry Page, without warning

12/10/2012 11:40:05 a.m.

JAN ELLIN wrote:

It's time the Opposition stopped mud slinging and showed us what their policies would do for the country, this Dot com affair is just a stage show and we are playing into his hands,if he has nothing to hide why does he not go back to America and face the charges laid against him, prove his innocence (if he can) then return to NZ to enjoy a peaceful life and let us NZs do the same, we are more interested in how the country is run and the economy than this nonsense-Labour and Greens, stop digging and show us how you would do things.

12/10/2012 9:10:29 a.m.

dennis wrote:

What are you saying Rsewyn? Without an open and straight-forward justice system we, in New Zealand, no longer have a democracy. In which case who are these people in Parliament and what is their purpose or objective, and how are they relevant to you or me? For Example, I have been trying to find out for over 8 months now how it is Dotcom was arrested by constantly asking for clarification of the Court's reasoning that he is facing extradition offences. It is some complicated argument between the tie-up of criminal liability for primary offending and civil liability (generally) for secondary offending under the Copyright Act. In my view the test should be if a particular offence would be charged in New Zealand in the converse situation. The Court are not obliging. That means, because I see no reason to keep their reasoning secret, that the arrest, the restraint of property, the aggravated home invasion and so on are all without authority. The whole thing is a sham

12/10/2012 8:47:30 a.m.

dennis wrote:

My next-door neighbour's chook is more popular than John Banks.

12/10/2012 7:12:19 a.m.

Rsewyn Officer wrote:

Kim Dot com is guilty send him back home. We have got more serious issues in NEW ZEALAND to worry about, than weather John Key knew about it, get over it + move on.

11/10/2012 7:25:41 p.m.

Al Kamp wrote:

The patrick gower interview of Friday Nov 18, 2011 is worth another look. Banks spends the entire interview denying something he later admits to in the last 2 minutes. (teapot tapes saga) Smugly lying your butt off with a gleeful narcissist smirk implying 'I got one over you and you can't touch me' rarely goes over well with people. Key should take note.

11/10/2012 7:13:11 p.m.

Just Me wrote:

I must say that photo of Banksie makes him look like some hideous wax-work out of Madame Tussards.