Hard News: So long, and thanks for all the fish ...
362 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 6 7 8 9 10 … 15 Newer→ Last
-
Lilith __, in reply to
But can we all agree that the fundamental barrier to an Ardern-led party is that she’s not standing for the leadership?
She isn’t? Oh, well that does make it rather hard then. :-)
Stuff yesterday had her as one of the frontrunners. But perhaps that was speculation. -
Hebe, in reply to
You are presuming too much about how willing the Greens are to be screwed over by Labour once again. As a significant and growing voting bloc is developing for the Green Party, eventually Labour's assumption that it is the natural party of the left with others as mere satellites will be proven to be foolhardy. Shaft the Greens again in favour of the likes of Peter Dunne (and remember it was Labour that let that man through the Cabinet door) and that tie will erode to nothing.
-
Sam M, in reply to
Probably, but the Greens for me need to translate their stellar poll showings into actual election results. We never really know what they will bring to the party until the night.
On current numbers, Labour won't have any choice. The 'left' block only looks meaningful when you add the Greens and Labour together. Divided, they are both also-rans.
The question which I always come back to is who will Green/Labour have to deal with to get over the line.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
who cannot win their electorate seat
The only thing demonstrates is enough dead rats collected and hidden away to ensure they get assigned one of the safe seats. Adern contested one of the more challenging seats around and did a good job.
I can't see that wallowing in a safe seat relying on the locals to vote the same way they have for decades is better sign of leadership qualities than getting out and doorknocking to try and win voters who might be genuinely swinging (their vote, not their lifestyle, although it is central Auckland ....)
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
She isn’t? Oh, well that does make it rather hard then. :-)
Stuff yesterday had her as one of the frontrunners. But perhaps that was speculation.I think I can confidently say now that she isn't seeking the leadership.
At a guess -- and that's all this is -- I would think she'd consider a deputy role if one was offered.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
but it’s about time both Labour and National got house trained out of their FPP born to rule habits, for once and for all
Hear, hear!
And on that note, it's worth observing that elsewhere in the world where they are more used to this MMP and mutliple parties sharing leadership it is not uncommon for a minor party to supply the PM. So a Labour dominant Labour/Green alliance might have Russell Norman as PM or Metiria Turei, or both. Leaving the leadership of Labour to be more about good ministers and policymakers rather than figureheads.
-
Hilary Stace, in reply to
Wellington Central is one of the wealthiest electorates in NZ and is not a natural Labour seat. Grant (like Marian Hobbs before him) keeps it with a mixture of extremely hard work, good organisation and an open and inclusive personal style. Also helps to be a nice person.
I am bemused in this current leadership selection by the numbers of people setting themselves up as the arbitters of what is left wing and dictating to the rest of us which candidate is left wing enough. It is OK for people to self-identify on some sort of left right continuum or spectrum but more problematic when applying your own personal opinions as universal criteria. Chris Trotter seems fond of doing this - yet from my perspective I find him very conservative and religious and not much of a champion of diversity or equity.
For me left wing means in favour of affirmative action to ensure equitable representation in parliament and equity in society generally (gender, disability, age etc), staunch on urgently addressing climate change, as well in much fairer distribution of economic resources. Someone happy to call themselves a socialist, and open to critiquing their own privilege and how it could be used for the betterment of humanity.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
You are presuming too much about how willing the Greens are to be screwed over by Labour once again.
The Labour-Green bloc is absolutely a given. There will be horse-trading a-plenty, but, that's the only way either of them will get into government.
And I think the belief that the Greens were "shafted" last time was elected doesn't entirely hold up. They simply didn't have the numbers to deliver Labour a majority on their own. NZ First did, and Peters declared he wouldn't be part of any support arrangement that included the Greens.
Things might have looked different if the Greens had had even one more MP -- to which they got bloody close. Couple of thousand votes, iirc.
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
but the Greens for me need to translate their stellar poll showings into actual election results
Which comes down to figuring out how to stop environmentally conscious but conservative voters looking at the Greens and running for the hills (and the local National candidate).
There is a non-zero portion of National voters who would vote Green if they would stop with the loony stuff and be a serious party with serious business policy as well as serious environmental policy. There is a bigger portion who would vote Labour if the Greens appeared more ... er ... sensible.
The Greens are trying, their push to become evidence based on most (but not all) of their policy is helping, but I doubt they can convince the electorate of a lack of loony* by 2014.
*note "perceived loony" is the same as "real loony" in this situation.
-
Ardern confirmed on Twitter a few minutes ago that she's not in the race.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
NZ First did, and Peters declared he wouldn’t be part of any support arrangement that included the Greens.
It's way off topic until the election threads start next year, but I'm not going to party vote for anyone who's going to be part of any support arrangement with New Zealand First. It might be relevant for Labour members to start asking some searching questions of their potential leaders about wooing Winnie, and not stopping until they get hard answers they can't held accountable to.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Ardern confirmed on Twitter a few minutes ago that she’s not in the race.
Full text:
Thanks for the messages! Many have predicted this already but thought I should confirm- I won't be putting myself forward for Labour leader
I hope everyone can now respect that she's smart enough to make her own decisions.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
It’s way off topic until the election threads start next year, but I’m not going to party vote for anyone who’s going to be part of any support arrangement with New Zealand First.
Which would be either of the two biggest parties if it came down to it.
-
Ben McNicoll, in reply to
EDIT: Oops, not quick enough. Russell already quoted Jacinda's tweet.
Removed as redundant.
-
If you want Labour to decide things quietly and clinically behind closed doors you are basically asking for it to be run the way Douglas did.
Also, from a purely media standpoint, you know what I'm really looking forward to? Four weeks of headlines about cool Labour MPs talking about how awesome Labour is in various dramatic situations. The press love a show, and a leadership race's a real good show, so let's have it.
-
Hebe, in reply to
The Labour-Green bloc is absolutely a given. There will be horse-trading a-plenty, but, that’s the only way either of them will get into government.
My view (as a green not as the party, mind) is that bloc is not a given, and that will hold until Labour gains any real understanding of and commitment to genuine power-sharing within MMP, rather than their present rather regal approach.
And I think the belief that the Greens were “shafted” last time was elected doesn’t entirely hold up. They simply didn’t have the numbers to deliver Labour a majority on their own. NZ First did, and Peters declared he wouldn’t be part of any support arrangement that included the Greens.
Not last election - the 2005 election deal. Labour royally shafted the Greens and deserves no trust until proven otherwise.
-
Hebe, in reply to
You may think so, but most of the population will switch off -- and Key's swingers will particularly hate it.
-
Hebe, in reply to
It’s way off topic until the election threads start next year, but I’m not going to party vote for anyone who’s going to be part of any support arrangement with New Zealand First
So you're a closet Green ? Hehe gotcha.
-
You may think so, but most of the population will switch off – and Key’s swingers will particularly hate it.
The evidence just doesn't back this up. Leadership contests are good for parties --- look at Obama/Hillary, or even Dave/Ed.
-
Henry Barnard, in reply to
deserves no trust until proven otherwise
And what would that proof be?
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
My view (as a green not as the party, mind) is that bloc is not a given, and that will hold until Labour gains any real understanding of and commitment to genuine power-sharing within MMP, rather than their present rather regal approach.
It would have to be a fairly significant lack of understanding to justify delivering centre-right rather than a Labour-Green government, surely.
Not last election – the 2005 election deal. Labour royally shafted the Greens and deserves no trust until proven otherwise.
I meant 2005. The Greens won only six seats (down from nine in 2002). NZ First won seven. The extra seat was the one seat Labour needed to form a working majority. Peters exploited the situation and declared he would be no part of a formal support arrangement that included the Greens.
Had Labour told Peters to get stuffed, there would have been no governing majority available to it. That is what the actual situation was.
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
The Greens are trying, their push to become evidence based on most (but not all) of their policy is helping, but I doubt they can convince the electorate of a lack of loony* by 2014.
Agreed. In many respects I naturally sympathise with Greens policies, but they have a couple of tendencies which are major deal breakers for me.
And Hebe:
rather than their present rather regal approach.
That's a politer way of putting it than I'd use. I really dislike Labour's attitude sometimes. National has the arrogance of the born to rule, Labour often shows the arrogance of the successful revolutionary.
So, assuming my wife gets her visa early enough for us to get back in time for me (and her, assuming she gets PR) to vote in the next election, who would I vote for? I really don't know. I strongly dislike the typical Green response to the word "China", and both parties' strains of economic nationalism have me worried, and yet they're the parties that push the policies I like most.
And is Mana going to take off, or is it doomed to the same fate as United Future? And if it does take off as a political movement greater than its sole MP, how will its policies evolve?
But it certainly is interesting watching the dynamic on the left. I've been wondering if Labour will self-destruct and the Greens mainstream themselves enough to take over as the major party of the left. Similar processes have happened in the past. And now the Labour leadership situation throws a new variable into the mix, I'm really curious.
And I'm really supposed to be preparing for an exam tomorrow rather than idly bloviating about things I know precious little about....
-
Gary Young, in reply to
Bart, I have to ask, in a spirit of genuine enquiry, just what Green Party policies do you regard as 'loony'?
It is an accusation levelled at the Greens so frequently in media commentary that I wonder if anyone can actually explain what they mean by it.
-
Chris Waugh, in reply to
And what would that proof be?
Just as a start: not ramming through poorly thought out legislation that screws over a major part of its core constituency (foreshore and seabed) or apparently out of vengeance (electoral finance). Dropping the attitude that the Maori seats and the working class and progressive vote generally belong to Labour as of right.
-
Hebe, in reply to
It would have to be a fairly significant lack of understanding to justify delivering centre-right rather than a Labour-Green government, surely.
Yes. Or accommodations by the centre-right that I don't believe are impossible over time (talking 20 years here).
I and others believe a deal could have been done in 2005 had Labour been truly willing to put MMP into practice. They were not and are still not unless they are the self-selected dominant partner.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.