ACT goes weird

Written By: - Date published: 8:05 am, August 12th, 2014 - 43 comments
Categories: act, election 2014, national, same old national - Tags:

This morning Radio New Zealand reported ACT Epsom candidate David Seymour complaining about Labour’s supposed dirty tactics in the seat. If Seymour really thinks that trying to persuade voters to vote tactically is dirty tactics then he should reflect on what his party is doing. Because it is clear that the only way ACT will survive is because National decides it will survive.

The report said:

Winning the seat is crucial to ACT’s survival as a party and to help it, Prime Minister John Key has once again told National supporters to vote for the ACT candidate in Epsom, even though Mr Key himself will vote for National’s Paul Goldsmith.

Labour Party candidate Michael Wood has condemned the deal, saying it goes against ACT’s core philosophy.

“The great irony of the campaign is that ACT is the party of no handouts, the free-market party of do-it-yourself, pull your own socks up, don’t expect other people to do it for you. And yet here we are, with them entirely reliant on a deal to gift them a seat.”

But Mr Seymour said Labour was encouraging its supporters to vote for Mr Goldsmith, in an effort to undermine the deal between ACT and National.

“They spend half their time saying its a dirty deal, and the other half of their time going and knocking on people’s doors saying ‘have you heard of Paul Goldsmith, we think he’s got some great ideas’.

Mr Wood dismisses that claim, although he said he was aware some centre-left voters were thinking of voting tactically.

National must be rethinking the deal and wondering if it is worth while. For one seat they have to put up with a party that complains about legislative racism but not societal racism, a party that regards incest favourably, engages in the most overt racism New Zealand has seen in a while and a leader that abuses the Race Relations Commissioner and obviously knows little about local politics.

There may be a cunning plan though. Last election ACT received 1.07% of the party vote and one seat. Proportionally its party vote was higher than the number of seats that it actually won and some party votes for the right were wasted. The master’s interests would be best served if as many ACT party votes as possible went to National instead and Seymour won the seat.

Maybe this is why leader Jamie Whyte has made such a hash of things. If this is the game plan it explains why United Future has been devastated and why Peter Dunne has become such a poodle.

From Seymour’s comments he seems to be saying that it is fine for ACT to distort and cheat the electoral system but not Labour. This is in keeping with ACT principles. One rule for them and another for the rest of us.

43 comments on “ACT goes weird ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Weepus beard 1
    12 August 2014 at 8:37 am

    One rule for them and another for the rest of us.

    Worth repeating. It’s so true.

    • Gosman 1.1
      12 August 2014 at 9:16 am

      Hardly. He is pointing out that Labour’s criticism of the deal with Act in Epsom is a littlke hypocritical if they then encourage their voters to vote National. That is hardly weird nor one rule for some and another for others.

      • emergency mike 1.1.1
        12 August 2014 at 9:40 am

        “if they then encourage their voters to vote National”

        So far the only evidence that that is actually happening is Seymour’s above moan.

      • aerobubble 1.1.2
        12 August 2014 at 9:56 am

        But wait a moment. Are you saying that should Labour revive the Progressive Party, where Anderson did a Espom like practice, and then have all its seat candidates stand as Progressive MPs, having people vote Progressive in the seat and Labour on the list. Then Key would not criticize them? Even as Key asks voters in Epsom to vote ACT in the seat and National on the party list.

        What’s weird is why the left never got angry about ACT winning one seat and giving National government. I sure your supposed to get angry then get even. Create a Labour seat party, LIKE NATIONAL has, ACT.

        Cunliffe should be raging abut Key’s yet another stitch up, and asking Labour voters to party vote Green and next election vote for a Labour seat party.

        But no, its not going to happen Labour loathes the idea of undermining National.

        Take the media love in for Key. We know the US and EU are printing cheap money, and China is accumulating it, and then Chinese are arriving in NZ to buy up anything that has value. Its not xenophobic, racist, to question land sales, especially when Chine, US, UK, OZ all have limits on foriegners buying land. Its totally ridiculous that Key’s National party get to cry racism of foreigners resident in NZ, who own assets, who agree with limits both for NZ and for their nation of origin. Its just doesn’t make sense to call people wanting to debate land sales xenophobic. Its wrong, its inflamatory. Yet the media is silent. Sure a bunch of drunks listening to a non-politician start shouting f-j-k, and implicitly Harra condemns Key for associating her party with manufacturing that, she’s been in politics to long to know that of all persuasions have ardent followers who go too far. Like Dunne who called all kiwis concerned about land sales xenophobic racists (and media aren’t calling Key out on that at all).

        • aerobubble 1.1.2.1
          12 August 2014 at 10:04 am

          Do you really think we are all racists John Key, just for standing up against land sales to non-residents?

          • Gosman 1.1.2.1.1
            12 August 2014 at 10:25 am

            No, mainly getting upset about the ones to Chinese is what makes it a tad racist. I don’t believe there was a major outcry over James Cameron buying farmland.

            • felix 1.1.2.1.1.1
              12 August 2014 at 12:29 pm

              There are any things you “don’t believe” Gosman. Oddly most of them still exist.

              The chinese line you lot are trying to run is a blatant lie and is racist itself. I have heard Labour MPs in parliament say that land ought to be owned by New Zealanders not foreigners, immediately followed by National MPs saying that’s not fair because lots of foreigners actually live here.

              I shit you not.

              This is the level of racism and stupidity at which Gosman and the National party are operating. They think a New Zealand resident or citizen who is ethnically Chinese is a foreigner.

            • framu 1.1.2.1.1.2
              12 August 2014 at 12:32 pm

              might have something to do with his intention to seek permanent residence

              when the issue is location of residence why do you keep trying to make it about race?

            • Tracey 1.1.2.1.1.3
              12 August 2014 at 1:12 pm

              I guess you mised the Greens anger at Shania Twain’s big property purchase and

              “Green Party co-leader Russell Norman said foreigners buying up New Zealand land will see land prices skyrocket, driving it out of the hands of kiwis.

              “There’s a bigger issue if you look at globally productive land, particularly land that can produce food and has access to water, which New Zealand obviously is well placed, that land is becoming increasingly valuable, as the price of food is only going to go up.

              “If we let that land fall into foreign ownership not only will it drive up the price of land in New Zealand so it will be very difficult for kiwis to buy farms. But it also means we lose one of our key economic positions globally.” on james cameron land purchase

      • Weepus beard 1.1.3
        12 August 2014 at 10:04 am

        If you’ll drop the hysterical whataboutery for a moment and look at the wider point made which is quite clearly ACT’s leg-up into parliament when their core philosophy is self reliance.

        • Gosman 1.1.3.1
          12 August 2014 at 10:29 am

          Technically you could argue Representative Democracy is an afront to ACT’s core philosophy as it involves a person claiming to represent the views of a group of people who might not have even voted for them. If you want to waste your time taking this route good luck getting traction from anybody that doesn’t already agree with you.

          • Weepus beard 1.1.3.1.1
            12 August 2014 at 10:35 am

            Dodged the argument, which means in all likelihood you don’t have one.

            Thought so.

      • tricledrown 1.1.4
        12 August 2014 at 10:37 am

        Goose the left learning to tactical vote must be worrying for National!
        Now another dumbarse Act candidate publicising to epsom labour and green voters on how to usurp the coat tailing in Epsom !
        priceless!
        Now bring on Ohariu!

      • Local Kiwi 1.1.5
        12 August 2014 at 4:17 pm

        Gosman,

        It’s all about perception idiot!

        But all you NatZ see is a dying dream to live in Government forever.

        What goes around comes around.

        Also just know that every dog has it’s day.

        Bye Bye. as Nicky Hager revels all tomorrow.

        Oh I forgot Kim.com on 15th September too, will you be there?

  2. Skinny 2
    12 August 2014 at 8:39 am

    Looking forward to bringing along some Epsom voters tonight for the Epsom candidate debate. We will be in the face of media hacks telling the Nation a thing or two.

    Like, if the deal with ACT is not good enough to attract the vote of former money trading shyster John Key, who lives in this seat, than why expect others too.

    Man up Prime Minister, leader of the National party, your talking up this shonkey deal so put your money where your mouth is you fucking hypocrite.

    • politkiwi 2.1
      12 August 2014 at 8:54 am

      Good stuff; give ’em hell.

    • Clemgeopin 2.2
      12 August 2014 at 4:26 pm

      There should be prominent large hoardings all over Epsom stating something like this:

      “John Key says he will give his candidate vote to National’s Goldsmith. Good on the Prime Minister! We should all follow Key’s very principled and honest stand here, because that is the right thing to do! Electorate vote : Goldsmith!”

    • Populuxe1 2.3
      12 August 2014 at 6:00 pm

      To which the obvious response “well it would pretty darn silly for a party leader not to vote for his own party”. I get your point, and good on you for fronting, but pick your targets wisely.

  3. Tracey 3
    12 August 2014 at 8:49 am

    If he is saying labour is against coat-tailing publicly but privately is encouraging people (officially) to vote Goldsmith, then he has a point, doesn’t he? Either be up front and say “we wont be putting michael’s face on billboards and dont want you to vote for him ” or dont tell people privately to vote for Goldsmith?

    • Skinny 3.1
      12 August 2014 at 9:15 am

      Push the button Wood the Labour and the Greens candidate Genter and announce your going to vote for Goldsmith and back him to the hilt both Party leadership. Simple reason is this coat tailing rule is a joke. Make a mockery of National & Act and their cosy little deal. Outside of Epsom and dirty deeds Dunne’s seat this pisses the Country off.

      Spark a revolt and watch the vote for Nact further slip away. Your gotthe moral highground now use it to your advantage.

      • Gosman 3.1.1
        12 August 2014 at 10:06 am

        National party supporters are likely to vote in greater numbers for Act in that case. It is highly improbable that left leaning voters are going to influence the outcome in the most right leaning electorate in the country.

        • Skinny 3.1.1.1
          12 August 2014 at 11:45 am

          I have family living in Epsom, they (4) are sick of being the butt of banjo jokes. I can tell you Act are not getting the candidate vote and it’s 4 ticks for Goldsmith. For playing silly bugger games National have ‘lost their party vote’ that’s 2 each for Labour & Greens. ACT is in a fight here and Key is rattled by the body language I am seeing. I have been enrolling recently and I am very sure L/G/NZF have quite a edge over the current regime.

          • Gosman 3.1.1.1.1
            12 August 2014 at 1:26 pm

            I doubt this family of yours was voting for Act in the past however in the unlikely event they did why did they?

            • North 3.1.1.1.1.1
              12 August 2014 at 8:07 pm

              Relevance to the thread Mr Grossman ?

            • Skinny 3.1.1.1.1.2
              13 August 2014 at 12:30 am

              simple as “good old Bankie”.

              Now it’s what a lying crook bent Bankie is! What helicopter pilot (Banks) doesn’t remember flying in a top of the range euro helicopter, it’s not like the model Dotcom has is common in this part of the world and ‘ you would remember flying in it.’

  4. Lanthanide 4
    12 August 2014 at 9:03 am

    “But Mr Seymour said Labour was encouraging its supporters to vote for Mr Goldsmith, in an effort to undermine the deal between ACT and National.”

    National is encouraging its supports to vote for Mr Seymour, in an effort to undermine democracy.

  5. tricledrown 5
    12 August 2014 at 9:04 am

    with Rankin helping split the vote National could be in serious trouble

    • One Anonymous Bloke 5.1
      12 August 2014 at 9:11 am

      ACT you mean. National will win the seat, Seymour wouldn’t bring another MP with him anyway so it’s no real loss. Except to the clown party 🙂

  6. Clemgeopin 6
    12 August 2014 at 10:26 am

    THE ACT PARTY :

    ‘ Association of Corrupt Tax dodgers’

    Vote tactically in Epsom to ‘see less’ of Seymour after the election

    and turn ACT into an

    ‘Artfully Consigned & Terminated’ party.

    Vote Goldsmith!

  7. tricledrown 7
    12 August 2014 at 10:29 am

    One AnonymousB MMP it gives National an extra MP + any extra votes over 1.3 % will give Act MPs they would not be able to get because of the 5% threshold.
    While National will have the same proportion of MPs with their over all percentage of the vote through the list will not be affected.
    one anonymous bloke i would remain anonymous but this tactical voting is a weakness on the left and we need to get up to speed in epsom Ohariu and stymie Keys chances of manipulating the electorate .
    the greens and labour supporters are the least informed tactical voters .
    especially the greens who could have tactically voted list in Ohariu and Labour in the electorate seat!

  8. fee 8
    12 August 2014 at 12:54 pm

    Ms Boag said on the Nation that National Epsom voters will do what John Key tells them to do.
    If I was a National Epsom voter (God forbid!) I would be a bit pissed off on being taken for granted like that.

    • Gosman 8.1
      12 August 2014 at 1:40 pm

      Yes but you are not a National party voter are you so I guess you won’t truly understand why they would do that.

  9. Gosman 9
    12 August 2014 at 1:29 pm

    To properly understand where Act is in relation to the chance of winning the electorate compare their position to polls prior to the 2011. Here is one.

    http://curiablog.wordpress.com/2011/10/10/epsom-poll-october-2011/

  10. Local Kiwi 10
    12 August 2014 at 4:24 pm

    In politics Goosman 2011 was a very long time from today as the saying goes a week is a long time in politics, and ACT has found that the bottom can drop out of their plans fast with J whyte eh!

    So you’d better go out and get a real job show pony for the NatZ as we wont need your services come September or from now.

  11. Populuxe1 11
    12 August 2014 at 6:04 pm

    As I predicted, so far it looks like the good burghers of Epsom feel insulted that they have been so taken for granted that ACT can front a twat like David Seymour and be expected to vote for him. Goldsmith is well ahead.
    http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/whoops-nationals-goldsmith-ahead-acts-seymour-epsom-ck-160580

  12. North 12
    12 August 2014 at 6:15 pm

    My God ! Driving the Lambho’ to the sweat shop – tune up a few of me lucky slaves ya know what I mean ? RNZ News 8.00 am. Seems Twinky Seymour’s pissed at the prospect of The Left voting tactically in Epsom. “Dirty tricks” and all that. Nearly landed the Lambho’ in the river I tell ya.

    ‘Character’ is the real question here. Not merely a thwarted sense of ‘Entitlement’. ‘Character’.

    What else can you say about someone who’s all – “Fine when I do it……foul when others do it !” ?

    What moral biffo lows would Twinky Seymour NOT plumb in service of the imperative of naked self interest ?

  13. Rodel 13
    12 August 2014 at 7:51 pm

    In my electorate I expect candidates to say’ Vote for me because…..’
    If anyone said vote for the other guy- not me I’d be insulted and say “f*** you!
    But then I’d probably not vote or scratch it as an informal protest.
    Be interesting to see how many informal ( ineligible, protest) votes there will be in Epsom.
    Probably few from the obedient sheep in Remuera…sigh!