Hard News: We interrupt this broadcast ...
372 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 9 10 11 12 13 … 15 Newer→ Last
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
So what's the best thing to do for all of us, then, who want to see a change of government? Do we all vote Labour, and hope for the best? Do we split our vote and give our party vote to Green? The latter is what worries me. A bit like the Auckland Mayoral election a few years ago, when people gave their votes to others, and Banks got in. Not the result anyone wanted.
A few years ago I realised that more or less every election for the last 20-odd years, both here and in the UK, I'd been hearing the same background whisper from the supposedly 'left' party, which was itself threatened with vote erosion from the left.
NuLab in the UK, threatened with vote erosion from the Libdems. Labour here, threatened with vote erosion by the Greens. 'Don't vote for them, vote for us, otherwise the rilly rilly eeevil tories will get in, and you don't want that, do you?'. So you vote for them, and they move in, start taking you for granted, knock you around a bit, and sleep with big business behind your back.
Well, personally, I'm kinda tired of being told it'll be different this time round, baby, she meant nothing to me, I promise I'll treat you right if you'll just give me another chance.
Labour don't have a hope in hell of getting back in, so I'd prefer to actually vote for something, rather than strategically. Green it is.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Can't say I agree with his idea for compulsory savings only for the poor. And his take on asset sales is simply anathema to me - justified because there's no blue chips in the stockmarket? WTF? How about all the ozzie banks that have been creaming us? Can't comment on UBI without buying his book, but it is good that he agrees that trickle down has increased child poverty.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Can't say I agree with his idea for compulsory savings only for the poor. And his take on asset sales
Eh? Can you please quote what you're responding to.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Labour don't have a hope in hell of getting back in, so I'd prefer to actually vote for something, rather than strategically. Green it is.
Yeah, I realized on the weekend that what I suddenly liked about Labour was that they were finally promoting policies which have been part of Green Party policy for a while. Also, voting for Green isn't voting against Labour, they'd be a natural partner if Labour could get enough.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Eh? Can you please quote what you're responding to.
Morgan says in your linked article:
The ideal would be for KiwiSaver to be required only of those whose current wealth indicates insufficient resources to fund an adequate replacement in retirement for their current lifestyle.
-
Sacha, in reply to
I linked to a Gordon Campbell article; that would explain the confusion. Here's the plain link from my post above:
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
Good piece by Gordon there, but I wish he hadn't brought up this one again:
The Greens have been out of real power for 12 years. Helen Clark spurned the Greens after the 2005 election, and chose to go with Peters instead.
Peters had the numbers and the Greens -- by a matter of a few hundred votes that would have given them an extra MP, iirc -- didn't. Peters declared he wouldn't share a coalition with the Greens and he got his way because he could provide a majority.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
My bad. Goodness, I don't know how I confused a tweet from @keith_ng about Gareth Morgan with your link. My only excuse is there's a picture of your face just below it in my tweet stream. Apologies.
-
Sacha, in reply to
I should change that picture to one of a flower to avoid future confusion :)
-
Sacha, in reply to
Peters declared he wouldn't share a coalition with the Greens
Dunne too. Campbell is coloured by his Greens involvement as Bryce Edwards by the Alliance.
However I've heard from someone centrally involved in the Labour-Greens negotiations in those earlier elections that 'shafted' would be a polite way of putting it.
-
Auckland mayoral <strike> "elections" </strike> beauty contests are FPP.
This election is MMP. It's fairly unlikely that the Greens will drop below 5%, or that Winston will get any seats. So a vote for the Greens vs a vote for Labour makes no difference in the overall left/right outcome.
That's the good thing about MMP, you can vote for whoever you want (unless it's a party with no hope of getting seats) and not worry about tactics.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
That's the good thing about MMP, you can vote for whoever you want (unless it's a party with no hope of getting seats) and not worry about tactics.
Unless, of course, you're in Epsom, in which case you should vote National, if you want a Labour government.
ETA: Electorate vote ONLY. Of course the party vote should go wherever you think it will count, and it will count for there.
-
Idiot/Savant on the prospect of a Greens/National 'teal deal'.
-
Jackie Clark, in reply to
Okay, well that's made me think a bit more. I knew I could count on you, oh fabulous one.
-
JacksonP, in reply to
Labour don’t have a hope in hell of getting back in, so I’d prefer to actually vote for something, rather than strategically. Green it is.
For reasons that may be considered in some circles as equal, but opposite, I concur. The only 'whatever the future' PR campaign I'm buying is the one in which we survive long enough to enjoy it.
The most important thing in all this is that those who don't want to vote Labour, or National for that matter, still vote.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
The most important thing in all this is that those who don’t want to vote Labour, or National for that matter, still vote.
The Greens seem to be the go-to party for those who support Labour's policies but not the actual caucus itself. Also, a double-digit Green vote would be in a stronger position to keep Labour honest.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Do we all vote Labour, and hope for the best? Do we split our vote and give our party vote to Green?
Depends on your electorate.
If you are in a marginal seat your electorate vote really counts so I would say vote labour. If you are in a safe Labour seat, vote labour electorate and Green party list.
If you are in Epsom vote electorate National and green or Labour list, a labour electorate vote in Epsom you may be helping ACT (A Cuppa Tea party, H/T Ian ;-) it should be the only time a person with a brain should vote National.. -
I reckon that electorate voting for the candidate of your choice is reasonable unless you live in Epsom or Ohariu. Or you feel the Labour person is one of the better ones and deserves more of a chance of geting in than their list position indicates. Or conversely, the National candidate is a bigger dick that the norm.
-
Sacha, in reply to
If you are in a marginal seat your electorate vote really counts
Can you explain what you mean by "marginal seat"?
Under MMP the party vote determines the overall numbers except for the rare examples like Epsom or Ohariu where a minor party is either in or out from the electorate result. As you've noted, in that situation the party to vote for tactically may be different in each place.
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
I knew I could count on you, oh fabulous one.
You're too kind, m'dear.
-
Rich Lock, in reply to
For reasons that may be considered in some circles as equal, but opposite, I concur. The only 'whatever the future' PR campaign I'm buying is the one in which we survive long enough to enjoy it.
Yeah, that too. Voting Green could easily be argued as hugely against my own self-interest. If that interest was defined rather narrowly: in purely monetary terms, and in terms of making it harder to indulge in various hobbies.
If Green policies were enacted, I'd probably end up paying a big chunk more tax, and I'm also a big petrolhead. I also do my bit to try and hug the occasional tree, but I've come to the realisation that I need a lot more legislative stick to make me 'do the right thing', than a self-provided carrot can give me.
As the frog once said, it ain't easy being green.
-
Also, on the left-wing voting tips, party votes going to the Maori party won't make a difference, as they'll have an overhang associated with them. If you want to support Maori party, give them your electorate vote, and party vote Labour or Greens.
And if you're confident that Act won't win Epsom, encourage right-leaning National party voters to vote Act party vote as well.
And if you're confident NZ First won't make it, encourage centrist anti-immigrant National party voters to vote NZ First.
And hope that the conservatives pick up a good 2 - 3%.
All will be wasted votes that'll get evenly distributed around.
-
And if you're in a Maori electorate and want more Maori representation vote MP for the electorate seat and Mana for the party vote (except for Hone's seat of course)
-
Latest poll results suggest a few other electorates might become more 'marginal' too.
A series of assumptions about electoral seats is needed before the party vote figures can be applied to the final make-up of Parliament.
But today's poll confirms several well-regarded Labour MPs may lose their spots in Parliament unless they pull off unlikely wins in their electorates.
Carol Beaumont, Kelvin Davis, Carmel Sepuloni and Stuart Nash are the highest-profile MPs in trouble, according to the poll.
...
Labour's only new blood would be the highly placed Andrew Little, and likely electorate wins for David Clark in Dunedin South and Megan Woods in Wigram.
While the picture is grim for Labour, the Green Party looks set to bring in a swag of new MPs.At 12.6 per cent – its highest rating in the poll to date – the party would see 16 MPs elected, up from nine, including nine new faces.
National, with 67 MPs, would have nine more seats, including 14 new faces.
-
Labour campaign manager accepts responsibility for leader not having budget figures (scroll to 1.25pm).
Trevor Mallard has taken personal responsibility for Goff’s unpreparedness on fiscal details at last week’s Press debate, which led to all the “Show me the money” stuff.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.