It is completely and utterly absurd to imply the existence of a hidden agenda to belittle women, or to attack their intellect.
You've got to be pretty determinedly obtuse to think any agenda there was hidden.
Going after the male market is fine. But these guys have a long history of confusing male and dickhead.
People say it's decent beer, I wouldn't know. There's more decent beer than I can try these days, why would I spend money on beer that proudly presents itself as by wankers, for wankers.
Librarians would love it, sir
This librarian had completely tuned out till you called.
This is a very good point. You do have to come down to voting yea or nay on any given bill, so the Parliamentary system does necessarily impose a binary distinction.
On any given bill, but there are a lot of bills. I don't know enough stats to know how solid this is, but Theyworkforyou did some analysis that suggests the binary distinction breaks down pretty clearly when looking at a series.
There would be no point in a challenge if it was impossible to know which way the person had voted.
You can play the numbers, maybe one of Reg Boorman's people had talked politics with your cousin on the train and thought he probably wasn't Labour, maybe they knew he was a accounting student and figured chances were...
If you challenge 200 people, and 50 of them actually voted for you, you've still knocked out 100 more votes for your opponent.
Knowing if someone voted is a whole lot easier - they're crossed off the roll. But not how they voted.
There would be great symbolic value in a Labour MP reclaiming Auckland Central.
Sure, but there would have been more symbolic value in Labour being able to form a government with support from the greens and all. And if that had happened Ardern would almost certainly have won Auckland Central.
I'm not sure why the reaction to losing an election is focusing on the small things your friends arguably made mistakes about rather than you and your allies losing an election.
(Full disclosure, yes I wish the left voters had acted differently in Ohariu, Epsom and even Auckland Central, but I wish more that a few National voters had acted differently.)
It is an equal sin, 50% of the seats are electorate seats.
And 100% of them (generally, with exceptions at the margins) are proportional.
If Kaye had lost to Ardern with no change in Party vote the number of seats National and Labour held in Parliament wouldn’t change.
If you're going to dream about different outcomes, dream big.
If I chose to be annoyed I'd rather be annoyed at people who party voted for parties I don't like. Those buggers gave National a second term, which is surely a greater sin than electing Nikki Kaye.
The Wgtn Central party vote (provisional) still went to the Nats
I see National taking the party vote by 40% to 50% Labour/Green. Which is who they were running against, according to me.
But yeah, on an FPP party vote they would've won.
Feeling a little weird being in Wellington Central. We're different and kind of freaky. But I'd like to think it's in a good way.
Conservatives didn't get into parliament. They got substantially more votes than four parties that made it. That's ludicrous.