If current polling trends pan out on election day then its starting to look like a National - NZ First coalition is what likely voters prefer^1^, with support from Act. Assuming any supposed talents or experience as a CEO bear any relation to negotiating political agreements.

But, it really boils down to turnout I think. ie are the poller's right in picking likely voters or not. If they've over-represented turnout then NACT is more likely. If they've under-represented then there's still a chance of Labour-Green-TPM just making a majority.

1: What the voting public are actually saying is National-Labour should form a grand coalition. This isn't as stupid as it sounds. Chris pulled Labour to the right to appear more centrist, and Christopher pulled National further right to (successfully) win supporters lost to Act.

But apart from their historical animosity, their more natural politics in this incarnation would be that National curb what they see as Labour's bad spending, and Labour curb what they see as National's rewarding landlords and wealthy people. It would probably make a bunch of kiwis fairly happy to not have what they see as the extremes of Green or Act or NZ First involved.

I'd hate it.