Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Five further thoughts

465 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 19 Newer→ Last

  • tony j ricketts,

    Matthew Hooton wants Labour to dump Cunliffe - isn't that enough reason to consider keeping him on for longer?

    wellington • Since Aug 2012 • 41 posts Report Reply

  • Jack Harrison,

    I guess Obama is the best leading politician on the left in terms of endearment . You can see how he engages well with multiple audiences. Key has studied him, it's a sway, an ability to go from laughter to seriousness and seem genuine. Key has a giggle, and a nice raise of eyebrows.

    Who in Labour can media it with Key?

    wellington • Since Aug 2014 • 296 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe,

    Shellacking: a perfect description. You win “word of the wrap”.

    Number 5: Everything about Labour’s approach to the Greens was and still is wrong. I really wonder if they are able to comprehend or action real partnership. I hope so.

    I have my own theories about Labour, but I won't chip in because I'm not a member and it is for them to sort out.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2895 posts Report Reply

  • Raymond A Francis, in reply to Lilith __,

    I hear what you are saying but most of the polls were a lot closer than that, I don't think either side thought it was in the bag
    I often wonder though what would happen if we held an election just a week later
    Everybody pile in to back a winner or a lot more strategic voting

    45' South • Since Nov 2006 • 576 posts Report Reply

  • simon g,

    The Labour-Green conundrum is not only about tactics, but the most basic question of all ... What do people really believe?

    In short, if we administered truth serum to every Labour MP, and asked them to put in order of preference the Greens, NZ First and National, what answers would we get?

    If our Harry Potter truth drugs actually worked, we'd have got people like Shane Jones picking the Nats over the Greens. And quite a few picking Winston over Norman and Turei.

    Now, I'd back Labour-Greens every time. And I genuinely believe that the public could be convinced to back that combo. But - here's the thing - only if the people doing the convincing were actually convinced themselves.

    But they aren't. So they won't.

    Short of purging the Labour caucus - which would probably cost another couple of terms in opposition - I have no idea what to do about this. They are the problem, and they remain.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 1319 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to simon g,

    FWIW you won't get Cosgrove to back the Greens: he was a Macraes Mining PR.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2895 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Hooton, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    Craig - it is a difficult balance, I agree. I am not saying Labour and Greens should be hostile. I am certainly not saying they should target one another (although Greens might criticise Labour on oil and gas, the way Act criticises - or tries to - National on corporate welfare). The point is they should just get on and do their best to maximise their combined vote (which, particularly in Labour's case must involve getting National voters to cross the line).

    Also, your point about worst result since 1922 is not as important as you may think. National's 20.93% in 2002 was its worst result ever. Brash's leadership, including the (in)famous Orewa speech, turned it around in a matter of months.

    I don't think National's constitutional review and conference (soul-searching in action) after the 2002 review was the powerful factor that turned things around. Maybe it was necessary. It certainly wasn't sufficient. Leadership is sufficient to turn around a party's prospects.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2007 • 194 posts Report Reply

  • andin,

    Politics is about leadership. Always has been. Always will be.

    You can see into the future? my my...

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1881 posts Report Reply

  • Jack Harrison, in reply to Matthew Hooton,

    Do you think National have their own in-house problems? National centre versus "tea party style" seat grabbers .

    wellington • Since Aug 2014 • 296 posts Report Reply

  • barnaclebarnes, in reply to Russell Brown,

    Maybe Labour's time has past. This century is not about blue collar workers but about saving our planet from destruction. Maybe the Greens are the way forward.?Neither Labour or National showed any long term vision for our country.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 90 posts Report Reply

  • Jack Harrison, in reply to barnaclebarnes,

    I know but we have a voting public who let the party who wins pass their laws. So the blue collar worker (very old term) has a vote and he or she has wants, like "job security" and "good wages" and "affordable housing" and that needs to be part of the civil equation because without that civility can suck .

    Labour and the greens are always workable together. Maybe a merger could help.

    wellington • Since Aug 2014 • 296 posts Report Reply

  • Joe Wylie, in reply to Matthew Hooton,

    (although Greens might criticise Labour on oil and gas, the way Act criticises – or tries to – National on corporate welfare)

    ACT haven’t done that since Hide’s ‘perkbuster’ antics, which was never anything more than posturing to the electorate. Unlike the Greens ACT has no electoral base to represent, and exists only at National's convenience to take the electoral heat off their hard right agenda.

    The Australian National Party has long filled a similar role in the federal upper house, allowing their Liberal coalition partners to play to the middle ground by taking electorally unpalatable positions on issues such as native title at the behest of the mining lobby.

    flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 4591 posts Report Reply

  • CRobinson, in reply to brin murray,

    Brin, I agree that National Standards are a disaster, but I think by framing your objection in terms of evidence of educational outcomes you are inadvertently playing the government´s game, using their vocabulary. Their whole mindset needs rejection (and rigorous refutation), not tweaking.

    Since Aug 2014 • 8 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Hooton, in reply to Jack Harrison,

    The most recent problem National had of that type was an attempt by former members of South Africa's Conservative Party - these guys: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(South_Africa) - to establish a beachhead Auckland, especially in the Rodney electorate but elsewhere on the North Shore of Auckland. They were stopped, you may think ironically, partly as a result of a counter-campaign involving Lusk and Whaleoil.

    Also, National finds itself torn apart by factionalism when its poll rating falls below 35%. When it is above 35%, these factions strangely disappear. I suspect something like that is true in all major political parties. Labour never seemed to have any factions 1999-2008, for example.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2007 • 194 posts Report Reply

  • TracyMac, in reply to barnaclebarnes,

    Er, I don't think looking after the environment and "blue-collar" workers are matters that need to be tackled separately.

    Also, can we please stop using the term "blue collar"? It excludes all those people working in service industries - cleaning, cooking, call centres - who aren't on the factory line or in trades, but who often get even shittier wages and conditions.

    Canberra, West Island • Since Nov 2006 • 701 posts Report Reply

  • Amanda Wreckonwith, in reply to Matthew Hooton,

    Labour never seemed to have any factions 1999-2008

    After sharing a table with Stu Nash at a Labour fundraiser during that period I can honestly say that's not true.

    Since Sep 2012 • 171 posts Report Reply

  • Joe Wylie, in reply to Matthew Hooton,

    an attempt by former members of South Africa’s Conservative Party – these guys: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Party_(South_Africa) – to establish a beachhead Auckland, especially in the Rodney electorate but elsewhere on the North Shore of Auckland. They were stopped, you may think ironically, partly as a result of a counter-campaign involving Lusk and Whaleoil.

    Opportunistically rather than ironically. When you're simply out to smear someone, religion seems to be as handy as racism:

    For the next few days Lusk and Slater ran two themes, attacking Robinson for his Christian connections – ‘the last thing the party needs is more allegations of interference in the party from religious brethren’21 – and attacking Pienaar about his past in South Africa: ‘there are a few people in the South African press who have long memories of this man, and there have been offers of providing full details of his extremely colourful past, especially in the 1980s.

    Nicky Hager, Dirty Politics

    flat earth • Since Jan 2007 • 4591 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to Matthew Hooton,

    The point is they should just get on and do their best to maximise their combined vote (which, particularly in Labour’s case must involve getting National voters to cross the line).

    This is only way to get a centre-left government. To do so will require a change in thinking by Labour's keepers of the flame.

    I've agreed with you twice today: PAS and Twitter: one of us is going soft. ;-)

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2895 posts Report Reply

  • CJM, in reply to barnaclebarnes,

    There will always be shitty office toilets to clean, holes to dig for more pointless cables, McJobs selling pappy burgers and soggy pizza, great waves of old, senile, incontinent souls to wash and dress. All manner of drudgery that will still require a being to get up in the morning and to do the work.
    One sector of society sees these people and understands their need to be rewarded, respected. Another sector of our society doesn't, gets irritated by their neediness.
    Yes, the planet is fucked up but as long as we still have the necks to fit into the collars some will be blue.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2014 • 107 posts Report Reply

  • Jack Harrison, in reply to Matthew Hooton,

    You are a big party, there will be factions, with the demise of the act vote into National you have inherited some out there thinkers.

    Both parties need to have a look at themselves, which is unusual. We need robust political thought in Wellington not old boys clubs sneaking in mates.

    wellington • Since Aug 2014 • 296 posts Report Reply

  • Matthew Hooton, in reply to Amanda Wreckonwith,

    I'll take your word for that. But my point is more around the "seemed to" bit.

    Auckland • Since Aug 2007 • 194 posts Report Reply

  • Hebe, in reply to Amanda Wreckonwith,

    Labour never seemed to have any factions 1999-2008

    After sharing a table with Stu Nash at a Labour fundraiser during that period I can honestly say that’s not true.

    They were too scared to pipe up. Labour factions were certainly warring in Christchurch at that time: stealthily and effectively.

    Christchurch • Since May 2011 • 2895 posts Report Reply

  • Amanda Wreckonwith, in reply to Matthew Hooton,

    "seemed to"

    That's not so much your point as your raison d'être.

    Since Sep 2012 • 171 posts Report Reply

  • Jack Harrison,

    By the way Matthew Hooten, well done for standing up to John T and Michelle B . This is what I want.Robust debate. You are an exception to the rule.

    wellington • Since Aug 2014 • 296 posts Report Reply

  • M Steinberg,

    *already committing to take their own action over child poverty are acting admirably.*

    Good on them, but there needs to be greater focus on family planning and access to contraception. That's fundamental along with education.

    Wellington • Since Mar 2014 • 3 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 19 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.