Posts by Hebe
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Stephen Judd,
The conflicts over the 80s are still playing out.
That’s the problem for those of us who would like to support Labour but cannot see how a party fighting quarter-century old ideological battles among itself can unify and run the country. Meanwhile, the very people you say you stand for suffer at the hands of the most rapacious lot of Tories since Ruth Richardson.
Why cannot Labour fight clinically and quietly behind closed doors? The battling is taking down Labour as a credible force: the slide in the polls is as much about the way Labour behaves as it is about the choice of leader.
Yes I speak from outside the party: don't you want to know what it would take to win my vote and others like me? Or would you rather be purist and in opposition? (Note no capital O: Labour has not a mortgage on being the main opposition party).
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Lilith __,
are we applying the same rules to the men?
I certainly am. Andrew Little, to be fair, has many years in the political game and around Wellington, so I think that counts for a lot in experience terms. But he would still need to have sat around a Cabinet table before becoming PM. From what I know of the Wellington scene, putting Ardern in that position would be setting her up to fail. In a term or two maybe she will be get there.
-
I intensely dislike "the belt-way": it's difficult to keep reading when that term comes up in a piece about NZ politics. It's good to find my hitherto sneaky dislike of the silly term is shared.
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Russell Brown,
[Ardern] has yet to win an electorate seat or be a minister
This. Not that she's a woman. Not that she's young. Not that she's good-looking. She is not far enough along in experience to handle leading a main party, and potentially being Prime Minister.
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Keir Leslie,
Will position of power and influence do?
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Keir Leslie,
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.
You are on the inside; I am on the outside, so we see politics differently. I am in one of the catchments of people Labour needs to win over, and the process Labour is using is off-putting; find another way if you want to win.
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Russell Brown,
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.
That clarifies the debate a little: and the rest are Labour voters or the unconvinced? Who Labour desperately needs? I would point out that the Labour chairman Tim Barnett has a long and illustrious record of being in the frontline of the internal party warfare.
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Sacha,
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.
-
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.
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Tom Semmens,
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.