Posts by Dennis Frank
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to Rob Stowell,
Yes Rob, quite right. That's why I supported her stand. Now that it seems the damage is greater than I expected, I'm becoming critical of her stand. It is a complex situation, multidimensional, in which the truth has many sides. Ultimately, losing control of the political narrative may result in no change to the govt at the election. A political leader polarising folks and thereby defeating her own side is incompetent, and the next polls may reveal this stark reality.
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to Trevor Nicholls,
Excellent analysis, Trevor. I feel the same. Essentially, we have a failure of political management at the top level of the party. I'm not blaming James. It will go down to how the consensus decision-making process was conducted. The party has rules that define how the process is supposed to work. I helped design them, and drafted them on my computer at home when I was convenor of the GP Standing Orders Committee long ago.
The key point I'm seeing now is how their decision can be justified in relation to our charter principle requiring appropriate decision-making. Anyone who thinks hijacking the political agenda and shifting it to the far left is appropriate is a moron. It's disrespectful to all centrists. It's driven by the sectarian mind-set that prevents the left from acting in our common interests. Partisan. Those in the GP driving this prioritisation of the need to represent beneficiaries rather than other green voters have clearly lost the plot. This election will be decided by swing-voters. They are centrists. Metiria & her supporters are in denial. If they really believe the hijack will work as a political strategy to change the government, they're also delusional.
-
I hope the two guys will publicise their views of the situation. I wouldn't put it past the lefties who still control the party to try and eliminate their right to do so. Could be a re-run of the schism that destroyed Values, if their position reflects the view of the majority of the party. Russel Norman's conference straw poll produced a two-to-one majority of the real greens over the leftists, but extrapolating that microcosm to the entire membership is a bit of a statistical stretch.
Nevertheless, the consensus process that has prevailed since the party origin in 1990 has finally fractured at the very top of the hierarchy. An historic occurence! Metiria will inevitably get the blame for catalysing the bad timing, and any drop in poll support for the Greens, but whether that is appropriate depends on the caucus decision to authorise and support her leadership stance. Or the lack thereof. If she briefed them fully, and they agreed to support her, they have no moral basis to resign that I can see. If she didn't, it's her problem - suddenly grown vastly greater than earlier today.
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to Rob Stowell,
Yeah. My comment was re that small group of swing-voters who normally determine election outcomes. Early July the Roy Morgan poll had those who think the country is headed in the right direction at 63% (the other two recent polls don't ask that question).
That evidence suggests no shift is likely. Complacency usually prevails in Aotearoa. But sometimes even centrists feel in the mood for a change...
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to Craig Young,
why has no-one suggested or analysed how the probable uptick in Labour's opinion poll ratings will impact on New Zealand First, which has historically been the beneficiary of major opposition party opinion poll softness- whether National or Labour?
Depends on the extent of the shift. Trotter reckons it could be as much as 10% but I'm picking 6% - half of that from each of NZF & Greens. Depends also how keen the crucial 3-5% of centrist swing-voters that normally produce our election outcomes are to change the government. Economy's good, so that traditional determinant doesn't apply currently. I suspect centrists are seeing the Nats as stale, noticing the Nat sleaze factor kicking in again, but still waiting for the left to provide what looks like a government in waiting rather than a shambles.
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to James Littlewood*,
Your reference to the list - "a handy list of transgressions of currently sitting government ministers" - requires an amendment. Only one of the eight names on the list fits that description.
I'll be voting Green for the 10th election in a row but disapprove your allocation of the Greens to the far left. At a stretch, it may seem to apply to the parliamentarians. It doesn't apply to the party as a whole, nor to the broader green movement. The authentic Green political position has always been neither left nor right.
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to Henry Barnard,
Yes, I saw that on Pundit. I have asked him for clarification because, to my untutored reading of the relevant section ("A person resides at the place where that person chooses to make his or her home by reason of family or personal relations, or for other domestic or personal reasons") it seems to me that there is profound ambiguity in this clause. It seems to read as saying that one can call a place The-place-of-one's-residence if one chooses to regard it as one's home for "personal reasons". In other words, `home is where the heart is' and not where one actually resides in the ordinary sense of the word. And if Turei's heart was in the last place she lived where her friend was standing for election, then surely she perfectly free to choose to call that her home, and therefore her residence for electoral purposes.
I'm seeking clarification too, Henry. The evolution of the Pundit thread has made Metiria's declaration seem as valid as John Key's re Helensville. If so, then the accusation that she committed electoral fraud ought to be directed at Key on the same basis. If this is all a straw man being waved by Paddy Gower, he ought to apologise to his viewers for screwing up. Doesn't mean the rest of media can avoid responsibility for recycling his accusation without doing their legal homework to discover he's wrong.
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to andin,
intellect has a really important part to play in the placing of trust.
So you can prove this is true by applying it to how voters will decide if Metiria Turei can be trusted to tell the truth nowadays, when they are wondering if voting green is a mistake. Explain to us how intellect plays a really important part in their decision. Or maybe you can't?
Most people decide if someone is trustworthy by reading their body language (facial expression primarily), supplemented by intuition and gut instinct - all part of their emotional intelligence.
-
Hard News: Metiria's Problem, in reply to Alastair Thompson,
something terribly wrong with our political discourse. Sanctimony on steroids.
The Shakespearean frame applies, plus the old christian morality plays. Character is destiny (folk wisdom) so the emergence of a character flaw switching a political trajectory of a leader from one pathway to the future to another quite different one fascinates the audience. Remember we have several generations now who were constantly brainwashed by tv melodramas as they grew up. I suspect around half of them still watch that crap too.
Democracy is a lowest common-denominator design. Then there's the nature part of human nature: emotional intelligence. Intellect has no part to play when folks are trying to figure out who to trust.
-
A lot of people get victimised by those operating our social welfare system. She's volunteered to represent these victims in parliament and deserves credit for doing so. Can you name any other parliamentarian who has declared their intention to do so?
Some are personally victimised by welfare nazis pretending to be public servants. Others inadvertently become victims of the system via ignorance of how to use it to their advantage, lack of good advice, etc. It would improve our society if this sector of the electorate had a parliamentary representative to advocate their class interests. Do they even have a lobby group? It's an unfortunate consequence of victim psychology that they tend not to organise in common cause (too busy trying to survive). Seems to be what motivated Metiria to use the policy launch to explain her intent to improve the system.
Unfortunately she lost control of the narrative because the media wanted to make it all about her instead, and she did provide them with the basis to do so. Poor political judgment? Perhaps, but doesn't it only seem that way because the media aren't reporting anyone supporting her in her stance. Sue Bradford? Laila Harre? Any sign of feminist solidarity? What about prominent male bleeding-heart liberals out there? What happened to balanced reporting? I acknowledge those supporting her here, but looks like our media pros now are too young to know that Bolger's govt deliberately set out to rig the rules to screw beneficiaries.