Even New Zealand First, which is sitting right on the 5 per cent threshold (from 7.2 per cent at the election), can tell itself that the poll did not take in the full impact of Shane Jones' populist pledge to get young unemployed "off the couch" and planting trees.
There is no comfort for Act's David Seymour except perhaps the knowledge that the poll can't go into negative territory.
But essentially, there is no significant change in any of the parties' fortunes.
The beauty of this poll is that because the methodology has changed, there is strictly no proper point of comparison.
The comparison with the election result is one of statistical curiosity rather than validity.
A comparison with the last Colmar Brunton poll would be to compare a poll conducted 100 per cent through landline telephone contact with the current one in which 50 per cent of respondents were contacted by randomly generated cellphone numbers.
The disappointment for the Government is that it has not received a bounce in support which Labour did after the 1999 election and which National did after the 2008 election.
The poll, translated to seats in the House, gives the three parties of Government the same 63 seats it actually holds in the Parliament.
But in both 1999 and 2008, the previous incumbent Government had been well behind in the polls at election time and it had received a drubbing.
National did not in 2017 and as a large and strong opposition is no frame of mind to consider it has been rejected in the same way. Although it accepts the legitimacy of the Government, English continues to point out that National has more seats than Labour and New Zealand First combined, the coalition Government.
