Can Sexism Save Simon’s Bacon?

115 comments on “Can Sexism Save Simon’s Bacon? ”

• Comments are now closed

1. marty mars 1

   13 February 2019 at 9:33 pm

   Getting desperate and the gnat rats will get worse – expect some more useless dirty tricks. Hopefully they are better than this dismal effort – the gnats have no sizzle or sausage – sizzleless simon sausage – get it while it’s cold.
2. mickysavage 2

   13 February 2019 at 9:41 pm

   Haha I was just mulling over the dogwhistle nature of their latest ad and marvelling that they would even do it. I mean pissing off half of the electorate is not a good starting point.

   And I used to marvel at the sophistication of National’s social media …

   I wonder what Judith thinks of this?
   • Enough is Enough 2.1

     14 February 2019 at 10:48 am

     When on earth did you ever marvel over the sophistication of National’s social media?
3. ken 3

   13 February 2019 at 9:49 pm

   Poor Soimun……all beef and no pork.
   • You_Fool 3.1

     14 February 2019 at 8:50 am

     I thought he was all pork and no beef?
     • ken 3.1.1

       14 February 2019 at 5:27 pm

       well something aint right about him.
4. Cinny 4

   13 February 2019 at 9:53 pm

   Wonder who the genius was that came up with the bbq idea? ROFL !!!

   PS… As a woman…. that ad comes across as a put down, it looks like national think that women are stupid. As for the two men in the ad, they don’t even look or sound cool, the older fella looks and sounds like Mr rugby, racing and beer. Maybe they are targeting a certain type of elderly male?

   Crikey they are being slayed on that twitter link.
   • mickysavage 4.1

     13 February 2019 at 9:55 pm

     😀
   • ankerawsharkP 4.2

     13 February 2019 at 10:49 pm

     Agree Cinny and the younger guy with the mo comes across as one of those complete know it all prats that you hope you never have to work with or sit next to at a dinner party…….
     • Cinny 4.2.1

       13 February 2019 at 11:27 pm

       That’s a bang on description Ank… re the young guy.

       I wonder if the nat’s engaged a psychic who channeled muldoon for advertising advice? LMFAO !!!

       Even funnier is the fact the someone signed off on it.
       • ankerawsharkP 4.2.1.1

         14 February 2019 at 12:46 am

         I seem to remember in the conversation Jami-Lee taped Simon wanted to spend the $100,000.00 donation on attack adds against Labour……………….Wonder if how they funded this one. The add appears to be so low budget that must give them a fair wack left. I am looking forward to more adds along these lines.

         But wondering who did sign the add off………….
5. Muttonbird 5

   13 February 2019 at 9:55 pm

   The last point from Elmer was an important one for Simon:

   Watch your bark.
6. Stuart Munro 6

   13 February 2019 at 10:30 pm

   I wonder why the Gnats stopped using Crosby Textor – was the price too high? Whoever came up with this is a lot like a private service provider – produces something which seems plausible until the cheque clears, and is away laughing. Maybe the same clowns who made the Steinlager ads that cost Lion China.
7. ankerawsharkP 7

   13 February 2019 at 10:41 pm

   f’ing hell………….that’s out of the 50’s. A text book case of mansplaining. Not to mention wtf the used the setting of a bbq! The comments are brilliant. Gosh the left are good and full of wit!

   This plus the petulant behaviour at the select committee today. National I love your work!
8. ankerawsharkP 8

   13 February 2019 at 10:44 pm

   This ad is marvellous. its such a f up from every point of view…………

   Does that mean if labour are all sizzle and no sausage, that National will give us the sausage????? What a vile thought

   Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
   • marty mars 8.1

     13 February 2019 at 10:50 pm

     yes I’ve watched it a few times now and everytime I find a new angle to laugh at – this will go done as one of the worst political ads of all time – up there with the dancing cossacks.
     • miravox 8.1.1

       14 February 2019 at 12:18 pm

       Scarily though. the cossacks ad was effective.

       This one feels Trumpist in that its talking to the base, if the base is ‘the ordinary bloke’.

       Maybe it’s aimed at the equivalent of Muldoon’s “Rob’s Mob”?
   • miravox 8.2

     14 February 2019 at 9:13 am

     Aside from the mansplaining, I’m ok with a bit of sizzle-talk, but much happier when the men keep their sausages to themselves.
   • Michelle 8.3

     14 February 2019 at 10:29 am

     national with give you the sausage without the bread and sauce
     • Fred 8.3.1

       15 February 2019 at 9:55 am

       “Bishes love my special sauce”

       – Ronald McDonald
9. Muttonbird 9

   13 February 2019 at 10:52 pm

   I’d say it’s James on the barbecue but he’s got a Kiwi accent!
   • ankerawsharkP 9.1

     13 February 2019 at 10:56 pm

     Muttonbird that is hilarious about James……………but within the realms of possibilities

     I think he was alluding to bbqs recently, maybe that was his way of giving us a sneak preview

     haha ha ha ha ha ha.
   • James 9.2

     13 February 2019 at 11:28 pm

     This is grilling not bbq.
     • Muttonbird 9.2.1

       13 February 2019 at 11:34 pm

       You’re a barbie snob too? Ok then.
     • joe90 9.2.2

       13 February 2019 at 11:52 pm

       It’s an outdoor fry up.

       But I’m a charcoal guy, so I would say that.
     • ankerawsharkP 9.2.3

       14 February 2019 at 12:48 am

       Oh come on James……fess up! It’s you isn’t it………………
10. ankerawsharkP 10

    13 February 2019 at 10:54 pm

    Agree Marty, although at least the dancing cosacks were a bit exotic back the day.

    What an earth were they thinking when they used the idea of a sausage………….just opening themselves up to all sorts of infantile jokes at their expense.

    The twitter feed is brilliant. I wonder how soon they will pull it. Ha ha ha ha ha ha
    • Muttonbird 10.1

      13 February 2019 at 11:12 pm

      That is some twitter feed. 😲
11. mac1 11

    13 February 2019 at 11:11 pm

    It had to be a BBQ. No greens at a barbie.

    Bugger all sauce. Bugger all friends, too.

    Interesting to see how the Nats see themselves. Dumb blondes and tartan-shirted hipster lumberjacks. Never saw the shoes, though. Were they brown?

    FFS.
12. Sacha 12

    14 February 2019 at 7:15 am

    If the advert is trying to peel off some NZ First voters to the Nats, even its cheapness is a good feature: like spelling mistakes in spam emails, it repels people who would ask awkward questions.

    To a fearful old codger who does not feel respected, it says they won’t waste money on stuff that doesn’t matter anyway. Honour the sausage!

    Being immediately detested by lefties will reinforce the idea that it must be right, Barry.
    • Incognito 12.1

      14 February 2019 at 7:37 am

      Correct. With (Nigerian) scams they make it easy to spot that it is a scam to filter and select for the gullible and most likely victims to fall for it. I can’t shake the feeling that the whole thing is deliberately bad and applying some kind of reverse psychology and stereotyping …

      We’ll have to wait for the poll bounce to see whether it worked 😉
      • ankerawsharkP 12.1.1

        14 February 2019 at 8:48 am

        Ok. So the add is so bad its good??? Not arguing here. Its an interesting thought. Could be aimed at NZ first 2.whatever %

        National, just like a Nigerian scam. Yes that rings true
      • Sacha 12.1.2

        14 February 2019 at 8:49 am

        “We’ll have to wait for the poll bounce”

        It probably will not show up any time soon. Their aim is only to get NZ First below 5% by the time of the election, which will not take much of a shift. They don’t even really care if it increases the Nat vote.
      • mac1 12.1.3

        14 February 2019 at 9:13 am

        Like this?

        “I am Oneway Bridges, first cousin to the Leader of the Opposition in New Zealand.

        He has been on a sicrit mission to revilify the National Party, and prepare for the soon-to-be mispronounced accession of a New Leader but now it is time to sausage him from his selfless tusk.

        Can u imagine the hull he has been through on ur behalf? Mixing with Judith Collins, seated everyday alongside Paula Bennett, hearing the bellowed inanities of backbenchers behind you, attending meetings of the pity faithful?

        He deserves improper compensation.

        Please send $6,000,000 to the International Bank of Choyna so we can ensure he never has to do this again.

        This is not sperm male. We have done this for previous Leaders, too!”
13. left_forward 13

    14 February 2019 at 7:24 am

    Don’t worry you pretty little head about stuff you can’t possibly comprehend deary, and take this fat, cholesterol packed, hot sausage and put it in your mouth. Now doesn’t that feel good?
    Oh Soimon!
    • Sacha 13.1

      14 February 2019 at 8:47 am

      I need more than a cheerio, Roger.
14. Sanctuary 14

    14 February 2019 at 7:45 am

    National appear convinced that if they go all GOP feral and try to ignite culture wars on absolutely everything they’ll win re-election.

    This ad though is just banal and stupid, it is like it was designed by 20 year old white interns just out of Kings.

    The trouble is the conditions for all out culture war and bone headed Trumpian populism don’t exist in NZ.

    Housing is a good example of the Gnats mis-reading the public mood on the issue. They think that because Kiwibuild is in trouble they can score political points off it, but IMHO the government has been given a huge free pass by the public on the issue because at least they are trying to fix the problem, unlike National who spent their time in office in denial.
15. Ross 15

    14 February 2019 at 7:57 am

    I don’t know why people are questioning the BBQ setting. Gillette used the same setting in their recent advertising. That ad got a lot of attention and plaudits, and also focused on half the population. Clearly National thought that if it works for Gillette, it must be good.
    • ankerawsharkP 15.1

      14 February 2019 at 8:52 am

      I think BBQ’s are a bit problematic for the Nats at the moment. Think of word association…..BBQ + National = coup brewing and leader about to be knifed.
      First the punters trash Kiwibuild at the BBQ then move on to the real agenda for the evening which is when not if to knife Simon.
16. WeTheBleeple 16

    14 February 2019 at 7:58 am

    Hosking reckons Simon’s off to a great start this year. 😀

    I know advocating violence is wrong, but just the one left hook…
    • ankerawsharkP 16.1

      14 February 2019 at 8:54 am

      Has Hoskings changed sides????? Keep spinning that Simon is good my son. Thanks Mikey. Your really helping the left!
17. Robert Guyton 17

    14 February 2019 at 8:28 am

    “Sick chin strap neck beard, bro.”
    Favourite.
18. Robert Guyton 18

    14 February 2019 at 8:42 am

    The young woman expresses her genuine delight in Labour’s housing plan, and is taken aback by the dishonest response from the chap with the sick chin strap beard. Slouching in the background, James grills a carcinogen for them both.
19. te reo putake 19

    14 February 2019 at 8:47 am

    Just watched the vid again. I reckon the actor playing ‘sensible chap’ is taking the piss out of Soimon. The way he says ‘un toitul’ has got be an in joke, surely?

    Given how successful this clip has been, they’ve rushed out another one:

    https://youtu.be/LS37SNYjg8w
20. greywarshark 20

    14 February 2019 at 8:52 am

    Is he copying the Key piddling in the shower extension of commonality (and faux communality) with the very common man and woman?
21. marty mars 21

    14 February 2019 at 9:22 am

    Brilliant young energetic enthusiastic labour supporter – the thick gnats got that correct.
    • te reo putake 21.1

      14 February 2019 at 9:29 am

      They missed a trick but not giving her a name. “Well, Cindy …”
      • marty mars 21.1.1

        14 February 2019 at 11:16 am

        Lol yep – she comes across really well compared to the hideous males. Talk about a fail ad – this one is a doozy.
22. Adrian Thornton 22

    14 February 2019 at 9:22 am

    To be fair this won’t offend National voters whatsoever, that human sized sewer rat Sir John Key publicly exposed himself as being super creepy and disgustingly sexist when he touched the waitress unwantedly on several occasions in a Parnell cafe he frequented …National voters didn’t give a fuck about that, so even though this ad is just so dumb it makes me want to find the people who conceptualized it and stick my fingers in their eyes, it is probably pretty on point for it’s stupid, selfish, low brow idiot audience.

    The majority of National voters are and always will be sexist, it is written deep into their regressive backward flowing DNA stream, ironically National Woman are probably the most sexist of them all.
23. Chris T 23

    14 February 2019 at 9:50 am

    Think people might over reacting a tad about that ad.

    Not saying it isn’t a bad ad, but she is hardly a candidate for sexist thing of the year.
    • marty mars 23.1

      14 February 2019 at 11:19 am

      Mate it’s so bad it’s gone to good. What an utter shambles the gnats are – gonna get messy in a bad way soon I suspect – make last year seem like a good one lol.
    • Fireblade 23.2

      14 February 2019 at 11:32 am

      Read the comments on Kiwibog. Even the National Party sychphants think it’s a monumental fuckup.
24. ankerawsharkP 24

    14 February 2019 at 10:09 am

    Chris T, No I agree.

    Its just so deliciously wrong on so many levels……………….Best laugh I have had in a long time………..

    Shows National feminist principles mean nothing (a need to close the gender gap and this BB) . or if they mean to be a pro women’s equity party, they haven’t an f..ing clue!
25. Siobhan 25

    14 February 2019 at 11:05 am

    Interesting choice of female in this ad., the Nats/tories’ are usually very fond of good looking blonds, I would have thought they would ask for “someone who looks like that weird girl from the Greens…you know the one, Swaaar-brick or whatever her name is“.
    • roy cartland 25.1

      14 February 2019 at 11:35 am

      she reminded me of that old ‘creepy girlfriend’ meme
      https://img.memecdn.com/overly-creepy-girlfriend_o_829146.webp
26. Ffloyd 26

    14 February 2019 at 12:10 pm

    Oh for Gawds sake. Is this all they’ve got. Starting to feel quite embarrassed for them. Plenty of ammo there for Labour. Bad P R for the Snarlers.
27. ankerawsharkP 27

    14 February 2019 at 12:18 pm

    Ffloyd . “Bad PR for the Snarlers” . ha ha ha ha.

    Article now on Stuff from Newshub, National getting roasted for sexist add. I am loving this
    • ianmac 27.1

      14 February 2019 at 7:08 pm

      And TV1 had a good bash at it too. But dear Paula was on too saying that there was nothing wrong with it and people just jump at every little issue. Is she saying that MPs should not be barking at every car?
28. tsmithfield 28

    14 February 2019 at 1:09 pm

    So I guess all those offended about this add due to apparent sexism would also be appalled at the multitude of adds that depict men as stupid.

    https://digiday.com/marketing/copyranter-go-ad-joke-still-white-male-moron/
    • Cinny 28.1

      14 February 2019 at 1:53 pm

      Sure I’m hearing what you are saying, and being a woman can relate, as we’ve been made out to look stupid by competitive ego driven men for thousands of years.

      Will simons ad gain him more votes or respect? No.

      Is simons ad appropriate in this day and age for a leader of a large political party? No.

      Does amy adams and/or any other female MP’s look stupid for sharing it? Yes

      Is national being slayed on twitter for the ad? Yes

      Are national supporters proud of that ad, does it inspire them to want to be like the blokes at the bbq? Very doubtful

      And the real kicker is… at the end of the blatantly low budget ad….authorised by Simon Bridges MP.
      • mary_a 28.1.1

        14 February 2019 at 6:52 pm

        Cinny (28.1) … thanks for pointing out Simon Britches authorisation of this extremely low intelligent ad. Ha ha, the clown has put his name to it 🙂 Now let’s see how he justifies it.
    • Jess NZ 28.2

      14 February 2019 at 2:08 pm

      Let me ‘splain. No, let me sum up.

      Women have been, and still are, discriminated against because of the dogma that women are, as a group and individuals, dumber than men. You can see this in any public forum about Ardern or Genter or Ocasio-Cortez, ad nauseam – so many comments are quite simply ‘she’s stupid’.

      There is no dogma or discrimination against men as being dumb – thus such jokes are not sexist but rather unimaginative attacks on those in an already privileged position. Same thing for white people claiming racism.

      ‘Our “-isms” require a rich, ugly history to precede them. They require marginalization en masse. They require everything spoken about above, including the institutionalization of bias.’

      https://www.bustle.com/articles/71400-6-reasons-men-can-literally-never-be-victims-of-sexism-and-those-who-think-they
      • tsmithfield 28.2.1

        14 February 2019 at 3:12 pm

        The fallacy in the argument in that article, is that it paints the target group, in this case males, as a homogenous group all sharing the same characteristics. When in fact that is not the case.

        A lot of males are not misogynistic and are actually very supportive of women’s rights.

        So, to say it is OK to discriminate against a whole group because some behave badly is illogical, which ever way it is directed..
        • Jess NZ 28.2.1.1

          14 February 2019 at 6:32 pm

          So you’re saying #notallmen. Sorry, you gotta get past that kneejerk response and listen to the history if you’re going to grow.

          It’s stereotyping, not sexism. And I’m not saying it’s OK. I’m saying it isn’t sexism, because males are the dominant gender. You don’t have to accept or understand the distinction for it to be true. But a bit of googling would get you heaps of explanations along the same lines.
    • roy cartland 28.3

      14 February 2019 at 4:31 pm

      Nope. The white male buffoon (ie dad joker) has been a thing for decades, Homer Simpson being a particularly obvious example. The thing is, men are celebrated for their idiocy – Homer is beloved by millions beacuse he is so dumb.

      Can you think of a female example? Me neither. Paula’s (and your) gender-switch argument is spurious.
      • indiana 28.3.1

        14 February 2019 at 4:37 pm

        https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000868/

        The Mallory Keaton character in Family Ties.

        Perhaps also the character Kelly from Married with Children.
        • arkie 28.3.1.1

          14 February 2019 at 4:52 pm

          I had to look it up cos I had no idea who this was. So much for ‘beloved by millions’

          Mallory was also presented as a vacuous airhead, who was fodder for jokes and teasing from her brother.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Ties

          Airhead synonyms include: bimbo, bubblehead, valley girl, dumb blonde

          How many of those are gendered terms? Seems like they’re not being celebrated for their idiocy, doesn’t it?
      • Incognito 28.3.2

        14 February 2019 at 9:02 pm

        Miss Piggy
29. ankerawsharkP 29

    14 February 2019 at 1:42 pm

    For me its not sbout the sexism. Its about the gigantic f up that the add represents.

    National isn’t a product that = the more publicity the better.

    Love that Simon had to explain that 33 houses a day isn’t inaccurate cause they took into account public holidays……..lol

    Happy days!
    • tsmithfield 29.1

      14 February 2019 at 1:54 pm

      But don’t you think that might be the point? It all seems so overt that it appears deliberately so, with a young blonde woman (typical stereo-types of “dumb blondes” etc).

      But perhaps this was a deliberate strategy to get the add viewed and talked about, even in a negative way. Those watching will still probably remember the 33 houses long after they have forgotten about the sexism in the add.
      • marty mars 29.1.1

        14 February 2019 at 2:48 pm

        Good you accept the sexism in the ad. The gnats will want to forget that but no one else will.
    • Cinny 29.2

      14 February 2019 at 1:55 pm

      It sure is a ‘what the fuckery’ moment. Super amusing.

      No they won’t remember the ad for the houses tsmithfield. They’ll remember it for being a wtf ad.

      The general public remember national for a housing crisis, it’s ingrained in our minds.
      • tsmithfield 29.2.1

        14 February 2019 at 2:14 pm

        Not so long ago people on the left were making a big deal about the Nats employing the services of Crosby Textor.

        So, if they are still getting that sort of advice, don’t you think this may have been a deliberate strategy? Whether it will be a successful strategy is another matter.

        But it certainly has created controversy. And controversy seems to be the key to getting noticed these days.

        Look at the amount of interest the add has had even now. Do you think it would have had that much attention if it were a male rather than a female appearing dumb?

        This add will probably get on the news now, where the 33 houses part will undoubtably get a mention. That makes the add fairly cheap publicity.
        • Cinny 29.2.1.1

          14 February 2019 at 2:30 pm

          The any publicity is good publicity narrative? That’s nothing more than an excuse to justify a crap idea.

          Bad publicity can destroy any brand.
          • tsmithfield 29.2.1.1.1

            14 February 2019 at 2:43 pm

            But remember a lot of people out there will just put this down to more PC nonsense and a fuss being made over nothing. But they will get the message about the 33 houses. Perhaps that is what the Nats are banking on.

            There will be others out there who agree the add is probably sexist, and that National should have thought better of it. But will also get the message about 33 houses.

            In the end, Labour made a big play on housing. And housing is much more important to people than whether an add was a bit close to the line or not.

            So, to that extent I think any publicity is good publicity in this case.
        • ankerawsharkP 29.2.1.2

          14 February 2019 at 3:12 pm

          Whether Nats committed this atrocity knowingly or not, isn’t really the issue. Either they are prepared to do anything for their aim or they are stupid, well IMO it could be either or both.

          The issue is that this add ain’t going to do them any good. There is such as thing as being remembered for all the wrong reasons
        • Tony Veitch [not etc.] 29.2.1.3

          14 February 2019 at 3:36 pm

          But the ad isn’t creating controversy, Tsmith, it’s drawing ridicule.

          And one thing any political party can’t survive is being laughed AT. Being made to seem irrelevant and just plain stupid is not a good publicity move.

          If you need proof of this, just look at ACT!
          • tsmithfield 29.2.1.3.1

            14 February 2019 at 3:55 pm

            If ridicule were a reason not to run the add, then Jacinda would cease appearing on the Hosking show every Tuesday because she cops a lot of ridicule as well.

            If you have a look at the comments on the stuff article, a lot of them are ridiculing the fuss being made about the add, or are supportive of it.

            https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/110591424/national-partys-kiwibuild-attack-ad-comes-under-fire-as-sexist-and-incorrect
            • Robert Guyton 29.2.1.3.1.1

              14 February 2019 at 4:09 pm

              tsmithfield – from the link you posted:
              “I don’t think it’s about gender.” Paula Bennett
              Right there’s National’s fail. Because they assigned to vacuous part to a woman, it’s all about gender, and they stuffed up. Why they couldn’t see it is a matter for discussion. The rest is pabulum.
            • Robert Guyton 29.2.1.3.1.2

              14 February 2019 at 4:12 pm

              And I did love this comment:
              “ME1
              That’s not a sexist ad. ”
              Too subtle?
            • left_forward 29.2.1.3.1.3

              14 February 2019 at 4:13 pm

              Well that’s stuff readers for you.
              The article didn’t even mention the sausage – carefully avoiding the subliminal metaphor (which has also been so widely appreciated) or just perhaps not getting why this is so hilarious… as well as blatantly sexist and wrong.
              Quintessentially ridiculous.
              • tsmithfield …

                14 February 2019 at 4:55 pm

                The most common metaphor for over promising and under-delivering is “all sizzle but no sausage”. So it is probably a bit of a stretch to read phallic meanings into the statement.
                • Sacha …

                  14 February 2019 at 5:24 pm

                  Steak, not sausage.
                • left_forward …

                  14 February 2019 at 5:47 pm

                  OK ts, I’ll ‘splain. Yes, the ‘all sizzle’ stuff is the up front attempted message, but the point of this OP is that in the context of the ad creator’s largely unconcious and patronising sexism, the sausage metaphor unintentionally extends the machoistic style. As TRP points out the message is therefore I have a big dick and Jacinda, well, oh dear, she doesn’t have one. Alternatively, I’m a big dick..

                  If you were more conscious of how this is patronising to women, you might not have to stretch too far to understand why this is so ridiculous.
                  • tsmithfield …

                    14 February 2019 at 6:13 pm

                    So this Greenpeace add is also making phallic inferences?

                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=475-KwUr3vU
                    • left_forward …

                      14 February 2019 at 6:17 pm

                      Where’s the don’t worry your sweet little head bit, followed by a close up of a fat dripping sausage?

                      And there’s only one f’ing d in ad!
                    • tsmithfield …

                      14 February 2019 at 6:22 pm

                      “Where’s the don’t worry your sweet little head bit, followed by a close up of a fat dripping sausage?”

                      I didn’t see either of those things in the National add.

                      But the Greenpeace add does start off with the word “banger”. Clearly referring sublimenly to the act of sex as in “banging”.

                      Also video of women putting sausages into their mouths, sublimenly referring to oral sex.

                      https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=banging
                    • left_forward …

                      14 February 2019 at 6:23 pm

                      I guess you see what you want to see.
                    • tsmithfield …

                      14 February 2019 at 6:31 pm

                      Exactly. You’ve got the point.
                    • left_forward …

                      14 February 2019 at 6:38 pm

                      The point ts is that it requires the sexist stuff for the context, but sheesh… you aren’t gonna get it are you? Oh well have a good evening.
                    • te reo putake …

                      14 February 2019 at 7:39 pm

                      As I see it, the takeaway from tsmithfield’s contribution is that National have been sprung, yet again, ripping off other people’s intellectual property.

                      Have I got that right, Slim?
                    • Shadrach …

                      15 February 2019 at 10:50 am

                      “National have been sprung…”

                      Could be. But then ts has ‘sprung’ some hypocrisy quite effectively.
                  • left_forward …

                    14 February 2019 at 8:14 pm

                    Yes you’re right TRP, as Sacha pointed out earlier, the saying is ‘all sizzle and no steak’, yet the Ngatz, as ts showed us, used Greenpeace’s exact same variation.
                • ankerawsharkP …

                  14 February 2019 at 8:56 pm

                  oh come on tsmithfield……………….the (masterpiece) add starts with sausages. If you would to ask people to free float re what they associate with sausages any fool can see it would be phallic……….
            • ankerawsharkP 29.2.1.3.1.4

              14 February 2019 at 5:48 pm

              tsmithfield. Go on admit your embarrassed by this massive failure of an attack add. Oh wait when Simon mentioned to Jami Lee that he wanted the $100000.00 for attack adds, maybe he meant to attack National.

              Ha ha ha ha ha still laughing
              • Cinny …

                14 February 2019 at 6:59 pm

                LMFAO !!!
30. AB 30

    14 February 2019 at 2:49 pm

    Remember – this ad is bought to you by the people who gleefully engineered (or at least exacerbated) the housing bubble to make themselves rich.
    Cranked up demand (via foreign buyers, no CGT, immigration) so it would overwhelm supply. Then they let the banks do the rest – a house is worth as much as a bank is prepared to lend on it, and if demand is hot they will lend (i.e. create ex nihilo) sh*tloads.

    The young guy looks super smug cos he reckons not enough houses will be built to lower prices and impact the capital gain he is expecting from his 5 rental properties. The old geezer is clearly delighted to be on the winning end of inter-generational theft. Typical Nats then – about as ethically developed as cockroaches.
31. RMM 31

    14 February 2019 at 5:00 pm

    The sausage is just a sausage, only you guys are making it about penises. But then, on the left throwing a dildo at someone you don’t like makes you a hero so I guess that should not come as a surprise. https://www.stuff.co.nz/northland/110361288/woman-who-threw-sex-toy-at-waitangi-will-attend-despite-police-trespass

    The REAL cringe of this National advert is the mansplaining, as Hipsterbeard made it really simple for Blondie so that her simple gullible female brain could comprehend.

    Don’t worry, I’ve let them know the advert is awful and tone-deaf and needs to be shit canned…

    Luvs

    RRM
    • left_forward 31.1

      14 February 2019 at 6:10 pm

      …and in the context of such sexism, the sausage becomes a fat penis. You are so close to getting this.
    • ankerawsharkP 31.2

      14 February 2019 at 9:03 pm

      Hi RRM, I have to say I think using a sausage just invites inane sexual innuendo. That’s my “beef” with it. I don’t know whether the sausage is sexist or not. It just leaves the ad open to such delicious ridicule. That’s one of the many aspects of this add which makes it such a massive joke.

      If you are in any sort of position to have the ad canned, please don’t. It’s been such fun to ridicule the party (who created the housing crisis) for their attempt to criticise those who are trying to fix it.
32. Enough is Enough 32

    14 February 2019 at 5:27 pm

    This criticism just walks straight into the right’s narrative of the “woke left” being perpetually outraged and looking for offence at every corner.
    • left_forward 32.1

      14 February 2019 at 6:13 pm

      Who’s outraged? This is hilarious.
      • ankerawsharkP 32.1.1

        14 February 2019 at 9:10 pm

        Agree left forward. I am not outraged either. It just can’t be taken seriously, but I appreciate others feel differently
      • Enough is Enough 32.1.2

        15 February 2019 at 9:43 am

        Julie Anne Genter
        Jacinda Ardern
        Every other person who has used the term “mansplaining” in the past two days.
        • ankerawsharkP 32.1.2.1

          15 February 2019 at 10:48 am

          Yes Enough is enough. But they do have a very valid point.

          Dumb blonde jokes went out in the 90’s for good reason. The ad is insulting womens’ intelligence.
          • Enough is Enough 32.1.2.1.1

            15 February 2019 at 1:17 pm

            Yep, and pointing out to LF that people are outraged. JAG was not laughing. She was most unhappy with National.
            • left_forward 32.1.2.1.1.1

              15 February 2019 at 2:15 pm

              Fair enough, Enough is Enough.
              I didn’t mean to underplay the offense – apologies.
              • Enough is Enough …

                15 February 2019 at 3:08 pm

                No worries
    • Cinny 32.2

      14 February 2019 at 6:55 pm

      I’m pissed off.

      Ask any attractive blonde how it makes them feel.

      Actually another woman should be the one asking an attractive blonde how the ad makes her feel, more likely to receive an honest answer.

      An attractive blonde is less likely to give an honest answer to a man (re how the ad makes them feel), for fear of another putdown. Attractive blondes have been dealing with that kind of shite for decades.

      Am also cracking up laughing because it’s a lame as ad; besides it’s pretty unlikely that a guy like that could score a chick that hot.
33. ankerawsharkP 33

    14 February 2019 at 5:50 pm

    No Enough is enough…….I am not offended at all! Just loving seeing National making an absolute arse of itself………………..Its too ridiculous to be offended by from my point if view. Gun meet foot
34. mosa 34

    14 February 2019 at 6:10 pm

    A friend of mine had a brief chat with Simon Bridges the other day when he turned up for a meeting and was on his own.
    Her impression was a positive one as he was friendly and cordial and very different to other Nats who have made an appearance here in the past who give the impression they are made of stone and the air of arrogance is permanating around them.
    She offered him a coffee but he requested some hot water instead.
    She was about to say aren’t you in enough of that already when he had to rush off for his appointment.
    She thinks he would have laughed at the joke so at least he has possibly a sense of humour.
35. ankerawsharkP 35

    14 February 2019 at 9:08 pm

    OK Mosa, Simon is human and maybe an o.k. guy. Get that. At times feel sorry for him and thought Winston went too far the other day in parliament.

    I see this ad as being a chance to ridicule National…………..given what they have done to the country and how they operate, I am happy to ridicule them.
    • mosa 35.1

      15 February 2019 at 10:45 am

      Could’t agree more ankerawshark P
      Just a bit of useless information i thought i would share.
36. Incognito 36

    14 February 2019 at 9:18 pm

    Another sad day in NZ politics when the Opposition holds the Government to account by moronic clips that belong in the deep dark corners of YouTube but not on the front page of NZ news.

    The same Opposition that sabotages Select Committee meetings in the most infantile way possible.

    The Opposition that cannot muster a proper argument against Government policies let alone come up with one themselves.

    The Opposition that rather debates through actors and MSM shills than doing the hard work themselves.

    They are not worthy of being in Opposition and it ain’t funny any longer 🙁
37. SHG 37

    15 February 2019 at 1:24 pm

    danylmc’s take at The Spinoff:

    Progressives are actually the primary target for this ad and it is designed to offend them. Offense and controversy makes things newsworthy and earns you coverage in the mainstream media, thus potentially reaching a far greater number of viewers than National would get through making a non-controversial, non-mansplaining ad. The way you communicate the KiwiBuild critique to the wider public – who are never going to watch a political ad in their feed, even if you boost it – is by breaching progressive rules of etiquette and provoking a controversy. This is Trump’s great innovation in political marketing: you don’t need to pay for advertising you just repeatedly outrage progressives, especially those who work in the media, and they’ll give you all the free coverage you could hope for.

    And, predictably, there are now stories about the controversy up on TVNZ and NewsHub with embeds of National’s ad.

    https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/14-02-2019/notes-towards-a-grand-unified-theory-of-the-terrible-national-party-sausage-ad/

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS