Hard News: Prospects
780 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 32 Newer→ Last
-
And on the "Epsom dilemma", it is as Christopher Dempsey says.
The Nats have certainly figured it out. I got a letter from Richard Worth this week headed "This election - give your party vote to National." The last line reads, "Choose a brighter future - this election, give your party vote to National", with the last six words underlined. Then, at the bottom is, "PS -- Make sure you give your party vote to National to change the government", with the words "party vote to National" underlined. No other words are underlined. Nowhere does Worth ask for the electorate vote. Get it?
I am staggered that there are still some people on the left that still can't figure this out. Usually we're the smart ones, right? But if you still don't understand, I posted a short summary on progblog, who were also having trouble getting their head around the intricacies of MMP: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3971499996691266005&postID=6154681028599336194&isPopup=true
-
Helen is speaking of this on Alt TV tonight.
-
My biggest worry about a Nat-led government is that, despite being pragmatic, they'll simply miss the boat policy-wise and the country will slowly slide backward. It won't be a malicious or ideologically-driven thing, it'll be the fact that conservativism will stop us from adapting quickly enough to deal with the challenges ahead
Bang on the money.
The problem is, Labour have been just as bad with the maritime timetable in this last term (2nd term, now THAT was something to behold)...
I'll be voting in Auckland Central in about 20hours or so and still don't know who'll get my party or electorate vote. I'm trusting Jeebus will let me know some time this evening... But, like RB said in the post, I just can't vote in that policy platform. And the DNA thing? Bloody hell... -
Harking back to an early comment, the 18 year old who is going to text her vote for Rodders to stay on the Island.
I'm an old curmudgeon, everywhere I look these days I see greedy selfishness (except at this blog, mostly). It might be because I work in education and I was raised by someone who lived during the depression. So not only do I get to see just how "I" centred the youf of today are, I also hate to carry debt and think my secondhand and old stuff is wonderfully adequate.
I think we have right wing governments so that life can get a bit hard for a lot of people. That way those folk who have had life pretty damn easy can see that life isn't an iPhone for everyone. Somethimes it is hard. People lose their jobs, go hungry, lose their houses, get screwed by their employers and the government sells the country down the river. That 18 year old never lived through Muldoon, she would not have been aware of Roger and Ruth. So she has no idea what can happen if you give control to people who care more about money than people.
Then just when things get really bad we sweep a left wing government into power and if we're lucky things get better for a while. (Of course there was always the Lange government, we thought we were voting left and got Roger Douglas. Boy were we screwed.)
But because we're forgetful, and new voters, who have never known life to be hard, get to vote, the right wing get in again.
I don't normally get this grumpy in a public forum but I am really angry that just as America looks like it's heading left, NZ look set to head right. "It's safe to come back." said a friend, maybe we'll think "it's time to leave."
-
"It's safe to come back." said a friend, maybe we'll think "it's time to leave."
Well yes. I said a while back. If you look at the migration patterns of Kiwis you will see that more people leave for foreign shores when it looks like we are going to get a National Govt. How John Key can make capital of that fact I will never understand.
-
Russell, improving public accounts is irrelevant when you have private debt is as bad as NZ's. Take a look at Japan. The public debt is 150% of GDP--an appalling state for a country in its stage of development. On the flip side, Japan remains a net creditor to the rest of the world? Why? Quite simply, households and the private sector live and operate within their means.
I personally blame the nanny state for the high level of private borrowing obviously brought on by a lack of tax cuts. This is what caused the housing bubble.
-
JLM,
Roy Morgan poll's out!!
-
I am rather relieved to not be in Epsom any more! I hated having to vote for a candidate I didn't necessarily support, in a tactical vote.
Personally, I'm still trying to understand why we even have electorates in this day and age. Geography is obsolete, after all. For me it's just a waste of ink - I'm in North Shore. I'm not voting for the National incumbent, Twyford will be in on the list anyway, and voting for a minor is a waste of time.
-
Not sure of the Science but it is said that Labour Governments have introduced change especially including social policies but National Governments seldom do. They consolidate and maintain the status quo. Not sure this next time though.
The Morgan Poll reflects what Helen believes and NZF apparently on 4.5% could upset with another .5 votes. Think of what that would do to the National position!!!! -
Roy Morgan is rather more positive for the left
Lab/Green/Prog 58
Nat/Act/UF 60
Māori 5BUT if Winston First make it to 5%
Lab/Green/Prog 55
Nat/Act/UF 57
Māori 5
Winston 6*shudders*
-
Wankers
Which ones? Neither side was acting appropriately..
-
Roy Morgan poll's out!!
Labour 34.5
National 42
NZ First 4.5
Green 10
United Future 1
Maori Party 2.5
ACT 4
Other 1.5So, in pure % terms, that's 46 for Nat+ACT, 44.5 for Lab+Green. Either would need Maori Party support to form a govt, with NZF as a potential wildcard if they grab an electorate or another .5%. Can anyone more realsistically break it down to seats?
-
Sorry, that was a bit slow!
-
Not sure of the Science but it is said that Labour Governments have introduced change especially including social policies but National Governments seldom do.
Social change almost invariably comes from Labour (or similar) governments. 40-hour working week, welfare state, homosexual law reform, abolition of the death penalty (for treason, and for everything else), civil unions, etc. Not a one of these fundamental changes to our social fabric came under National. Hell, there are still MPs in the House who voted against the Death Penalty Repeal Bill in 1989, and the Homosexual Law Reform Bill in 1986, while members of the National Party.
-
From the newspaper headlines we will never see
Peter Davis unrelentingly honest and selfless- Nats
-
Paul, I have no idea what you are saying, however I do believe that NZ's debt will be very destructive to the social cohesion of NZ. That's what pisses me off about Labour the most. For all their progression, they've glossed over and failed to contain what has been a glaringly obvious problem for years (for those who were actually bothered to look at it or admit it). David Skilling should be mentioned for trying to make it an issue, but NZers don't seem to want to see it or admit it.
-
wankers
Quite. Who are these people?
Which side?
The Nats were an assortment of greys, hyped up on the scent of imminent victory. The Labour people were students and union people, organised at the last minute by cellphone, and excited by the thought of ruining Key's photo op. There was also a pair from Both Eyes Open, which is how I know this stuff ;)
The guy with the megaphone was being a dick, or at least had no imagination with his slogans. The National people who were trying to get in his face and take it off him were being bigger dicks. Speech you don't like is part and parcel of democracy, and you just have to put up with it. Sadly, many of the National people seemed to have real problems with that concept.
I prefer to protest politely. But its interesting that National's crowd wouldn't even tolerate that. The police, OTOH, had no problem with it.
-
That's what pisses me off about Labour the most. For all their progression, they've glossed over and failed to contain what has been a glaringly obvious problem for years
Damned if they do, damned if they don't. You're complaining that they did "nothing", but if they'd done things in keeping with the allegations that fly from the fingers of Farrar and Slater you'd probably be bitching just as loudly that they're nanny-statists, interfering in the free choice of the population to spend its non-money as it sees fit. And even if not you, many, many others.
-
Personally, I'm still trying to understand why we even have electorates in this day and age.
Electorate MPs often do important work. While many electorates will also have a list MP's office in their electorate, they're not the same. It guarantees you local representation, and makes it more likely that they will be more responsive to local needs.
My view of MMP is that we have an electorate system which uses the list MPs to bring proportionality to parliament. Not that we have a proportional system which happens to have electorate MPs left over from our old system.
-
By my calculation (well the Stuff virtual election calculator) the Roy Morgan poll gives Labour, Progressives, Greens 57 seats and Act, National, United Future 59. If we assume the Maori Party gets 5 seats then they will determine who leads the next government.
-
OK Matthew, so we reduce it down to a pissing match between red and blue. Just another example of how NZ is content to wallow in ignorant bliss until the shit hits the proverbial.
-
I do believe that NZ's debt will be very destructive to the social cohesion of NZ. That's what pisses me off about Labour the most. For all their progression, they've glossed over and failed to contain what has been a glaringly obvious problem for years.
Bryan Gould's Rescuing the New Zealand Economy has quite a bit to say about this. There's so much wrong with the monetarist consensus that both main parties have shared for the past 25 years. And virtually none of it gets discussed in public fora. Blaming the appalling state of the newsmedia is one thing, but of course it raises the question: what the hell do we do about it?
-
I have only one thing to say. If you don't vote Labour, you're stupid, if you vote National, you're stupider and if you vote ACT then you're stupiderer. init?
Mr Barnes: Guess which finger I've got rigidly extended at this very moment? But it is a wonderful attitude for reality-based folks who want to win votes.
-
You're complaining that they did "nothing", but if they'd done things in keeping with the allegations that fly from the fingers of Farrar and Slater you'd probably be bitching just as loudly that they're nanny-statists, interfering in the free choice of the population to spend its non-money as it sees fit. And even if not you, many, many others.
Well, let's be honest here. Pretty much the entire discourse - on both sides of the fence - is dominated by wingnuts. Nothing much makes a whole lot of sense, especially when distilled into soundbites and photo-ops. Is it any wonder we have a campaign based on personality? All people are left with is their gut instinct.
-
The reaction of the Epsom candidates to my feedback when they were cavorting on the Orakei roundabout this week (at different times) was interesting.
I shouted to the ACT guys that "I would never, ever vote ACT" - Rodney yelled back that I was being childish. (He was the grown man in fancy-dress!)
Whereas when I shouted to Richard Worth to vote Labour - he just gave a big chortle and a big NOOO!!!
Post your response…
This topic is closed.