Hard News: So long, and thanks for all the fish ...
362 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 15 Newer→ Last
-
Lilith __, in reply to
Is Ardern not ready yet? She’s been an MP as long as Robertson and longer than Little.
Key had very little experience. And look at him.
-
Nor has Robertson or Little (or Shearer for that matter.) Jones has, but blotted copybook. Cunliffe is the only contender who has ministerial experience.
Not saying Ardern’s right, but I’m pretty wary of the “not ready” label being attached here when it doesn’t seeming to be attached to men of similar or less experience.
-
Keir Leslie, in reply to
Seriously, are you saying don't vote for Grant 'cause he's gay?
-
Amanda Wreckonwith, in reply to
Is Ardern not ready yet? She’s been an MP as long as Robertson and longer than Little.
After her reaction to the "zip it, sweety" episode, I think she needs to bake a bit longer - skin's still a bit thin
-
Hebe, in reply to
a bit more filthy mongrel in taking on Bennett
If Labour spent more time mongrelising National and less time savaging its own people, Pullya Benefit and the other Nats would have something to worry about.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I think Labour should take a punt and give Jacinda Ardern the reins.
I know Jacinda and have great respect for her. But I suspect even she wouldn't think it was her time.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Not saying Ardern’s right, but I’m pretty wary of the “not ready” label being attached here when it doesn’t seeming to be attached to men of similar or less experience.
Fair call. But Robertson's ninth-floor experience will have been a more prodigious insight on the reality of government leadership than, say, Shane Jones would have been able to glean. I'm leaning toward Cunliffe because he's so intelligent, and perhaps personality issues can be worked on.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Being ready is not just about length of time. Jacinda seems unlikely to put herself there just yet. A few years as Minister or Deputy, more likely.
-
I should say, that I thought Jacinda wasn’t ready, or was too inexperienced, and the I read this series of tweets by Chelsea Torrance and I kinda rethought that a bit.
-
Sacha, in reply to
snap
-
Sacha, in reply to
Guess party members at that leadership contest roadshow must have seen something in Cunliffe before caucus chose the other guy instead.
-
I mean, I'm not some kind of Jacinda Must Run And Win diehard. But I think it's pretty problematic to say that an ex-IUSY President, ex Goff/Clark staffer, ex-senior UK Cabinet Office civil servant is inexperienced, compared to say, Little.
-
Geoff Lealand, in reply to
... and once was a student of mine ... Irrelevant, I know, but she always remembers you and is a genuine, intelligent woman. She was the only MP at the recent Big Screen event in Auckland and was there to listen.
It helps too that she provides a welcome contrast to grey-suited, pudgy male MPs (incidentally, has anyone else noted how dead Key's eyes look these days? They resemble a stunned armadillo) -
Sacha, in reply to
Probably better if you stop reading 'not ready' as 'inexperienced'.
-
Hebe,
I don't understand the Labour Party: the schism of the working-class hero brigade and the causes wing is so deep and so bloody that no-one is willing to listen: both lots of you start bellowing at the first words from the other side (this thread is unintelligible to non-Labour people). You are so willing to draw each other's blood in public, much preferring to tear each other apart and leave the remains for the right to gorge upon. It makes it impossible for any centrist swing voter to think of you as a credible alternative for government.
If you lot cannot agree to disagree within your own party, why in hell would anyone let you run the country?
If you disagree so deeply, have the courage to split and form two parties. The way you are, you will all be directly responsible for National getting a third term, and I for one will never forgive you for the misery that will unleash among the people you say you are trying to represent.
The next election is there for Labour's taking, but only if you all get your shit together pronto.
-
Sacha, in reply to
have the courage to split and form two parties
that would be good
-
Sacha, in reply to
this thread is unintelligible to non-Labour people
not all of us
-
NBH, in reply to
this thread is unintelligible to non-Labour people
To be fair Hebe, I'm not sure how many of the people who have participated in this thread are actually 'Labour people'. One of the other chronic issues Labour has is a lot of people (myself included) telling them what they *should* do, without getting involved in the party and helping them do it.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I mean, I’m not some kind of Jacinda Must Run And Win diehard. But I think it’s pretty problematic to say that an ex-IUSY President, ex Goff/Clark staffer, ex-senior UK Cabinet Office civil servant is inexperienced, compared to say, Little.
Little's no chance. But consider this: Jacinda hasn't won an electorate seat, and can't be sure of doing so next year either. She is liked and respected within Auckland Central, but so it Nikki Kaye.
Not an issue for a Green Party leader, but it would be unprecedented for a Labour leader.
-
Erm, how many members of the Party are actually commenting here? I don’t think there’s many, and certainly I don’t recognise the picture you’re painting of some irreconcilable gulf. It’s also worth saying that, in fact, this process is how we work out disagreements.
[ETA To Russell: yeah, I agree that's an issue. And I'm really not saying Ardern Is The Answer, or anything like that. I'm just wary of a narrative where women have to be AMAZING and men can just be very good, which sometimes develops in the Labour Party.]
-
Amanda Wreckonwith, in reply to
but only if you all get your shit together pronto
That's what a true leader can do.
I'm glad to see some passion at last - Labour just needs more control and direction -
Russell Brown, in reply to
I don’t understand the Labour Party: the schism of the working-class hero brigade and the causes wing is so deep and so bloody that no-one is willing to listen: both lots of you start bellowing at the first words from the other side (this thread is unintelligible to non-Labour people).
To be fair, in terms of "Labour people," it's pretty much Tom v Everyone Else, which is not exactly an uncommon situation (although this time there's also Pete George, who tends to get people's dander up in any forum). Stephen's active in the party, as is Keir. They're both contributing thoughtfully.
-
Tristan, in reply to
/agree the very first line out of slater/Farrar/hooton will be she can't even convince the urban liberals in Auckland central to vote for her so she can't convince the rest of the county ... Bullshit but they won't stop saying it till its true
-
(Same goes for jones and little)
-
Hebe, in reply to
not all of us
Sorry I was speaking for myself.
My politics are what I would define as pragmatic idealist. I have often electorate-voted Labour, and usually party-voted Green for two and a bit decades. I look for strong candidates and policy that I agree with on core ideals. Some Greens' policies do not sit well with me, but the core environmental message I believe is essential to survival of life on Earth. However, I don't need to crucify any Green who stands for the policies I do not like. And that's where the Labour bloodshed baffles me.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.