Colmar Brunton poll; Simon Who?

Written By: - Date published: 8:07 pm, August 5th, 2018 - 94 comments
Categories: election 2020, jacinda ardern, labour, national, Politics, polls, Simon Bridges, winston peters - Tags:

The 1 News Colmar Brunton poll tonight confirms the worst kept secret in Wellington; National are tanking under Bridges and Bennett.

There’s an eight point gap between the government and the inspiration free zone that is the opposition.

The poll covers the last few weeks, including National’s underwhelming annual conference that delivered as its centre peices an idea stolen from ACT, and, er, a recycled Labour Party policy.

The National Party leader,  Simon Bridges, only just registers on the preferred PM poll despite Jacinda Adern being on leave and the Nats having 6 weeks to land a hit on Winston Peters.

Score update: Winston 1, National nil.

And, worst of all for the Nats, they sent their leader on a ‘meet the people’ roadshow that saw Simon exiled in Naseby and Sefton when he should have been leading the News at 6.

Well, the people met Simon alright. Turns out, they don’t much rate him.

 

Party Vote:

National Party 45 per cent (Same as 19-23 May 2018)

Labour Party 42 per cent  (Down 1 per cent-point)

Green Party 6 per cent (Up 1 per cent-point)

New Zealand First 5 per cent (Up 1 per cent-point)

Act Party 1 per cent

Maori Party 1 per cent

Preferred Prime Minister:

Jacinda Ardern 40 per cent (Down 1%)

Simon Bridges 10 per cent (Down 2%)

Winston Peters 5 per cent (Up 1%)

94 comments on “Colmar Brunton poll; Simon Who?”

  1. BM 1

    Tanking? [Brutally censored by the so called ‘tolerant left’. Don’t be a dick, BM. TRP]

    National outpolling the main government party 9months into a new term after 9 years in opposition is fucking bad, screams one term government.

    Ardern has to magic up some PM skills over the next year otherwise this government is gone even with the shitty and useless Simon Bridges as leader of the opposition.

    High chance of losing to Simon Bridges, this is how bad this current government is.

    • Muttonbird 1.1

      “Don’t be a dick, BM”

      Impossible, evidently.

    • Cinny 1.2

      It’s MMP baby, national don’t have enough seats or friends to create a government.

      The majority of national supporters don’t want simon as PM.

      Facts are facts BM.

      • BM 1.2.1

        Yet the party is still at 45%, if they went with Collins or Adams National would be well over 50%

        As for MMP unless Jones can buy a seat with the 3 billion dollars gifted to him by Labour then NZ First is gone.
        3 billion fucking dollars to buy that fat pompous prick a seat, what a waste of taxpayer money, it’s the worst display of pork barrel politics I’ve ever seen.

        The Greens are also border line

        • Cinny 1.2.1.1

          I’m not sure collins or adams could lift their party to have enough seats to govern alone.

          You say the Greens are border line, yet simon appears to want to make friends with them. He’s been talking up James Shaw big time.

          Buying seats….. two words, ACT Epsom.

          BM do you think simon will last until the election? Personally I don’t. Time will tell, but at the moment he’s failing big time.

          • BM 1.2.1.1.1

            Adams or Collins would drag over a lot of female votes.

            If you looked at voting statistics you’d find far more women voted Labour than men with the opposite being true for National.

            Why National want to make friends with the Greens is just off the charts stupidity, chasing that looney 5% when there’s half the voting demographic you could be targetting makes no sense at all.

            Bridges is a poor John Key imitation if National can find their brains before 2020 and install a female leader then National will win outright.

            • Sabine 1.2.1.1.1.1

              BM 1.2.1.1.1
              6 August 2018 at 8:15 am
              Adams or Collins would drag over a lot of female votes.

              ‘drag’ them from where and with what? bound and gagged, vote here or else we sanction you?

              Nah, you might as well get Paula Bennefit to drag the ‘female’ votes to the No mates party.

            • Cinny 1.2.1.1.1.2

              BM, re collins, she is too polarizing and many women really don’t like her. I don’t think for one minute that collins would bring a lot of female votes. I don’t think having a female leader is enough to bring them a win.

              I absolutely agree with you about bridges being a poor john key imitation.

              Sheez simon was defensive and almost angry on the AM show this morning, not a good look for him, or a way to win votes.

            • veutoviper 1.2.1.1.1.3

              As a female voter, I can assure you that Adams and Collins are two of the (many) reasons I don’t vote National.

            • infused 1.2.1.1.1.4

              Collins will get it.

            • KJT 1.2.1.1.1.5

              Adams or Collins would drag on a lot of Alien lizard votes. Fixed it for you.
              Never met a woman that likes either of them.

              • BM

                Hardly surprising you’re a green party member all the woman you’d know would be raving nut bars.

                • In Vino

                  A truly pathetic response, Bullshit Mountain. And I think ‘women’ was the word you struggled for – unsuccessfully.

        • solkta 1.2.1.2

          I think regional development is something that all three parties support. There is certainly a need to do something in Northland.

          • The Chairman 1.2.1.2.1

            While I’m generally supportive of Labour’s regional development plan, it seems they are dishing out funding with little to no stipulated expectations in return.

            For example, there is no direct return expected for the taxpayers investment.

            There no set number of jobs expected.

            No full time employment expectations.

            No living wage expectations.

            Therefore, it seems to be little more than corporate welfare with potential employees reliant on the trickle down theory, which is more akin to a National party approach.

        • marty mars 1.2.1.3

          I’m feeling a lot of pain and denial there mate.

          • Incognito 1.2.1.3.1

            So much pain, it’s almost unbearable to watch …

            • marty mars 1.2.1.3.1.1

              yep I hope it is turned into a walk in the bush or some hard digging – rather than externalised or internalised.

        • North 1.2.1.4

          You’re “fucking” angry today BM. What’s wrong fella ? You know you really should pass on allusions to “border line”.

        • Marcus Morris 1.2.1.5

          Dream on BM. What I despair of is how National’s solid 45% will never accept responsibility for the social and economic damage that occurred during National’s nine years in office. Crisis in the health system (underpaid nursing staff and appalling lack go maintenance), exactly the same scenario in the education system, the uncontrolled and rampant price increases in housing, especially in Auckland with the worrying consequence that my generation’s (baby boomer and wartime babies) grandchildren may never own their own home unless they belong to National’s 45% and what about Auckland’s traffic issues unaddressed (JK cynically ignoring the plight). The Inner City Rail Link could have well been near to completion by now had the National Government heeded Mayor Len Brown’s repeated requests for Central Government assistance. This refusal would have been made on purely on petty political grounds. Add to that the dreadful rise in poverty over those nine sterile years while the well-off (substantially National’s support base) made considerable capital gain over the partial sale of strategic state assets. Let’s not forget the failure to contribute to the Michael Cullen’s Superannuation fund (again I would suggest on purely ideological grounds). Of course your lot will never admit to Muldoon’s colossal superannuation blunder which continues to cost the nation billions. To quote former cabinet minister Hugh Templeton from his book: “All Honourable Men”, So Muldoon’s electoral lark looked like becoming a fiscal albatross. The book was written in the nineties. Cullen spent much of his time in Parliament addressing this particular issue and the Super Fund is specifically designed to offset the long term fiscal burden of National Super.

          To sum up, the task in front of the present government to sort out this massive malaise is huge and they have certainly begun the task with considerable enthusiasm and not a little expertise.

          The issue for me is to continue to remind the other 55% why they rejected the smug self -satisfaction of the 45% and to keep those reasons firmly in front of them.

          Oh and I forgot to mention the dreadful and never ending costs of the leaky building syndrome, a direct result of the deregulation of the building industry which also occurred under National’s watch – all in the interest of increasing profit at the expense of quality.

      • Wensleydale 1.2.2

        When you shit in everyone else’s Weetbix, no one wants to have breakfast with you. I guess National are only just now learning that.

    • Dean Reynolds 1.3

      National will never win office again until they overcome 3 significant hurdles: 1) A leader who can compete with Jacinda & no current National MP compares, 2) A coalition partner who can achieve 6% of the party vote & no one’s in sight, 3) As from 2020, the millennial voters will outnumber the boomers & millenials don’t vote for neo liberalism which has shafted them with student loans, unaffordable housing, etc. National has to convert to Social Democracy to win the millenials – how likely is that?

  2. Ad 2

    Even though I criticize this government a bit, the public sees that they are doing a good job.

    Labour at 42% after the crap we’ve gone through since Helen left is just totes amazeballs miracle.

    • What do you mean” the crap that we went through since Helen left”. Hele Clarke as Prime Minister was only slightly to the left of Roger Douglas and did nothing meaningful for either workers or Maori rights.
      I say this as an old trade unionist

      • Dennis Frank 2.1.1

        Not wishing to pre-empt Ad, but the crap we went thro under JK was qualitatively different to the crap we went thro under HC, which was qualitatively different to the crap we went thro under JB, which was… (and so on, ad nauseum)

        Health warning: sniffing too long at these various piles of crap may turn you into a dog ; )

  3. rightly or wrongly 3

    “National are tanking under Bridges and Bennett”

    “National Party 45 per cent (Same as 19-23 May 2018)”

    Definition: tanking

    ‘fail completely, especially at great financial cost.’

    Now I left school with no qualifications but even I can figure out that maintaining support from the previous poll does not equal ‘tanking.’

    TRP, if you want help with comments that proclaim hyperbole with a little more accuracy how about trying these out:

    Collapsing Bridges – Simple Simon’s support gets shakey.

    National maintains support but Bridges who?

    No mates National comes up short again.

    Double BB sagging in support – time for a refitting.

    • You should probably think of the sporting definition of tanking, rather than the financial. The failure to be competitive, inability to land a blow etc.

  4. tsmithfield 4

    Yes. Bridges is the “Andrew Little” of the National Party. But when Little was in charge of Labour, their popularity tanked. Yet strangely, National’s is holding up strong.

    The left must be hoping that National doesn’t put someone better in charge as that could add 5% or so to National’s popularity.

    • Fireblade 4.1

      Who do you think should replace Simon Bridges?

    • Tricledrown 4.2

      Tsm your talking FPP Their has never been more than 1or 2‰ between each block.
      Nationals only hope is to bring Shane Jones and NZ first by giving him Northland and 10 Bridges +$1 billion a year.
      National will have to swallow 1 to many dead rats.

  5. Draco T Bastard 5

    The National Party leader, Simon Bridges, only just registers on the preferred PM poll

    And, as has been pointed out on this board before, Helen Clark was actually doing worse before the 1999 election.

  6. pdm 6

    Given that the Party Vote is what counts it seems to me that National can be well pleased with the situation almost a year after the election. Although they have no viable coalition partners – with both NZF and the Greens teetering a round the 5% mark and bearing in mind that the Greens support could plummet if they support the insidious Waka Jumping Bill Labour may well be in the same position sooner rather than later.

  7. Sanctuary 7

    The biggest news from this poll is there is no news, and indeed the two blocks of the “left” (Labour/Greens) and the “right” (National and ACT) are as usual neck and neck, with populist NZ First making the decisive difference.

    The changes from the last poll were all of 1-2%. In other words, margin of error stuff.

    • Dennis Frank 7.1

      Yep, I saw that when watching the announcement last night. I suppose an optimist could point out that L+G=48, so 3% ahead. It does contradict the so-called slide in support for the government that some commentators were suggesting (due to the honeymoon period being over).

      • Sanctuary 7.1.1

        The Nats still haven’t grasped that being on 45% artifically inflates their hopes. Imagine if it was National on, say, 32%, the New Conservative Country party on 7% and ACT on 6%. All would be doom and gloom, hanging on whether or not their allies made it over the threshold in the latest poll. Because they’ve collapsed the right’s vote into one party they have an artifical expectation of where they are at.

        The biggest threat to the coalition government is the Greens, who seem to be hellbent on finding endless ways to squabble and in-fight amongst themselves.

        I can see NZ First’s Waka jumping bill (a trivial piece of legislation with quite a lot of support outside the beltway constitutional pearl clutchers who write long and tedious articles on the topic) becoming a cause celebre amongst those that comprise the Green Taliban, who seem to be having a collective nervous breakdown at the compromises involved in being in government and might prefer impotent ideological purity over being in parliament at all.

  8. Pete 8

    When the news is not so good David Farrar is slow to mention a poll and searches for an angle.

    This time he’s on the job minutes after it’s announced. “45% a great result for National
    …. It is frankly incredible that National is at 45%.”

    And it’s not about the leader, it’s about the party. Yeah, yeah we know all that. It’s a new tune on the hit parade though. When it was Shearer and Cunliffe it was a different tune wasn’t it?

    • Grantoc 8.1

      Obviously it was a ‘different tune’ Pete. And this is the ‘different tune’ – when Shearer and Cunliffe were tanking, so was the popularity of the Labour party and the leadership of Labour was then inextricably linked to the party’s popularity.

      Currently, National is getting about twice the support that Labour was at time of Shearer and Cunliffe – the party vote is not tanking, and the link between the current leadership of the National party and the party’s popularity is not significant. Its a completely different dynamic to the days of Cunliffe and Shearer et al – and so a different tune.

      If/when National’s vote tanks then its likely to be ‘good night nurse’ for Simon Bridges if his personal popularity doesn’t improve.

      A more fruitful analysis would be to look at why National’s party vote remains very strong despite its leader not doing so well in the popularity stakes. Maybe, actually, leadership popularity is, in the end, not so important, and its not the factor that determines who becomes the government.

      • Dennis Frank 8.1.1

        Tribalism, plus the lack of a coherent alternative. Pragmatism will only get the current government so far. Labour cannot get traction without abandoning the pretence at being progressive. Voters are averse to bullshit. Labour actually have to start being progressive.

  9. RedBaronCV 9

    What happened to the Roy Morgan polls ? Have they vanished ? And if so who used to pay for them & release them? Part of me is assuming that they are still being done but aren’t sufficiently right favorable to be released.

  10. Grantoc 10

    Te Reo Putake

    How about this ‘spin’ on last nights CB poll.

    “Labour, the largest government party, “tanks”, as it falls further behind National, the largest opposition party. Since becoming the largest party in government, Labour, in a first in NZ politics, has failed to lead the major opposition party, National, in the polls since the election, over 9 months ago.

    Labour’s hold on power is precarious with its two support parties teetering on the edge of the MMP 5% threshold.

    Not even the charisma of it’s leader, who’s popularity only rose by 1%, despite giving birth to the nations ‘first baby’ made a difference to how the major parties ranked. The Acting PM during the PM’s absence, Winston Peters, despite his increased public and media exposure could only muster half the popularity of the the leader of the opposition.

    The government is in trouble”

    I guess you take your pick on which ‘spin’ you want to believe.

    • Marcus Morris 10.1

      The only poll that will matter is still two years away and this government is making steady progress in solving all the issues it inherited. Time will tell but my money is on another left leaning coalition.

  11. at least he sticks up for free speech. Strange how conservatives are the only ones doing that these days. Intolerance is now a characteristic of the left it seems.

    • Puckish Rogue 11.1

      https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=nazi

      nazi

      Someone who has an opinion that is different than my own.

      Seems legit 🙂

      • Puckish Rogue
        .. sad how idiots so freely use the word Nazi to smear and demonize opponents without having the faintest clue what it was all about back then . Different opinions are great: Prefer those that can be defended with reason and logic. Danke, das reicht.

        • Robert Guyton 11.1.1.1

          Sad how people so freely use the word “idiots” to demean opponents.
          Unwittingly misusing a word shouldn’t make a person an “idiot”, should it?
          You seem very quick to categorise your opponents to their disadvantage, Paul. Perhaps you haven’t thought this through, you know, unwittingly using a word…

          • Paul Martinson 11.1.1.1.1

            Robert …far from quick to judge. An opinion based on a long experience with folks laying down the Nazi word in front of you for silly reasons. My grandparents were murdered by the Nazis. My partners side saw terrible things in Germany in WWll . People who use the word so feely debase it and insult the suffering of others for what.

            • Robert Guyton 11.1.1.1.1.1

              Well, yes, Paul, I get that, only people do the same with the word “devil”; cheeky devil, cunning devil, etc. but they don’t mean it literally, as I imagine is the case with most people you hear using the word “Nazi”.

    • mauī 11.2

      I don’t think conservatives deserve much credit. But I do find the trend from the left shutting down counter views worrying. It isn’t healthy for society. Would the ancient Greeks have banned certain topics from debate? So what happens next, do these people and their followers go underground?

      • mauī

        you only empower people by trying to shut them down this way. LS and SM are literally a by-product of an increasingly intolerant far left.

        • marty mars 11.2.1.1

          That is ridiculous – luckily in times past, as today, left leaning people stood/stand up against intolerance and bigotry and hate. They are the heroes and the leaders not the moaning, pretend left. The middle is full of white lines and danger – no place for conviction.

      • marty mars 11.2.2

        wtf – YOU shut down my comment yesterday about t.rump by putting an Obama was worse one, now you sanctimoniously bemoan the shutting down of views. Sort your house out.

        • Paul Martinson 11.2.2.1

          marty mars 11.2.2
          “wtf – YOU shut down my comment yesterday about t.rump by putting an Obama was worse one, now you sanctimoniously bemoan the shutting down of views. Sort your house out.”

          didn’t comment yesterday or shut you down. So not sure what your referring to but I’m referring to to right to have views heard publicly v.v Lauren S

        • mauī 11.2.2.2

          Ok, I thought I bought something to that debate, that it isn’t all Trump’s fault that bees are in trouble and we should take a wider, more holistic look at the issue. I was denigrated by two diff commenters for offering that up and neither engaged with what I posted.

          I apologise that I could have engaged with your initial post more directly and only talked about Trump and wildlife areas.

      • Carolyn_Nth 11.2.3

        You are over-romanticising ancient Greek democracy.

        Ancient Athenians, usually cited as developing the first democracy, didn’t allow totally “free speech” for all. Only adult male citizens could participate in voting for legislation. No foreign resident, slave or woman could voter.

        Only male residents that met the property criteria could take on the highest offices in the government. Only the agenda for the general assembly of male citizens was set by the council of 400 – so most males could not choose the topics discussed.

        We actually have much more freedom of speech these days than did the ancient Greeks. Unfortunately some people abuse it – so we don’t have totally unrestrained freedom of speech. And it does depend on the context.

        With freedoms come responsibilities and it helps to have some respect and empathy for others circumstances – especially if they are marginalised and discriminated in some ways.

    • Robert Guyton 11.3

      Only conservatives stick up for free speech these days, Paul?
      What nonsense. I’ve spoken with many progressives recently who stick up for free speech.
      Saying “intolerance is now a characteristic of the left” implies that you believe the left used to be tolerant, but now aren’t – what leads you to believe there has been a change?

      • KJT 11.3.1

        Don’t see any, “conservatives” sticking up for the Maori lady Bob Jones is trying to sue into silence.
        Free speech is only for those who can afford Lawyers, eh!

  12. Robert Guyton,
    why is it that Don Brash filed for a court injunction to protect the rights of speakers he didn’t even know or care about….but no one else. Why is it the PM said NZ is a place where all voices can be heard but was seemingly silent on the current issue v.v Southern…and left it to Simon bridges to say we shouldn’t stop people speaking what ever their views. Correct me if I’m wrong but where are these progressives now when they should be so outspoken in the media.

    • McFlock 12.1

      Southern and Molyneux were able to be heard – they could stand up in the town square like anyone else.

      Finding people complicit in their plan to monetise their free speech, on the other hand, was more difficult.

      Tories are standing up for at least one speaker who’s argued that some “races” are more intelligent than others. In a time when the POTUS says some of the people chanting “the Jews will not replace us” during torchlight parades are good people.

      Distasteful speech that needs to be protected? Speech that Brash or Bridges happen to agree with? Or speech that promotes violence and ethno-exceptionalism?

      • McFlock

        “Tories are standing up for at least one speaker who’s argued that some “races” are more intelligent than others.”

        doesn’t matter what they spout/ its about their freedom to do so. Christopher Hitchens once said he would march for the rights of Neo Nazis if they were prevented from speaking.
        BTW there are actual scientists ..believe it or not who run with the same daft views about race and IQ as they do. Where do you think Southern got it from. They didn’t make it up. Even though it could never be valid science given you can’t establish so called racial identity anyway..because that’s arbitrary and meaningless nonsense. Neuroscientist and liberal Sam Harris is one of their sources. Bet he wouldn’t be banned from speaking by the mayor Auckland. Ugh

        • McFlock 12.1.1.1

          Hitchens would march for the right of neonazis to slit his own damned throat then.

          Pricks get dismissed and laughed at but tolerated, then they get elected with the support of people already in power who think they can be used, then they screw with the judiciary, then they start the main legislative game plan. We’re watching that pattern happen for at least the third time in a hundred years.

          edit: BTW, if the views of those “actual scientists” are “daft”, then you spiked your own appeal to authority.

          • Paul Martinson 12.1.1.1.1

            McFlock

            “Freedom of speech means freedom to hate.” [Christopher Hitchens.]
            Sadly he’s not here today to defend Southerns rights… as distasteful as he would find it but he had real integrity which is sadly more than most these days.
            Hitchens said “if some speech is so vile it must be banned, you are establishing a principle that those in power can do the same thing; and that raises the possibility that speech that you favor can be banned. After all, one person’s hate speech is another person’s free speech.”

            • arkie 12.1.1.1.1.1

              This is all theoretical though, because these Canadians were not banned from expressing themselves. They still have their freeze peach.

              Freedom of expression is not freedom from consequences. Constantly complaining you are under threat and being censored by ‘violent leftists’ doesn’t mean that people have to stop objecting to your opinions.

              Now if you keep insisting that the Canadian pair have been banned; and they’re not nazis, just racists; that people should listen to their arguements; you look like you are defending the content of the speech, rather than their freedom to express themselves. It makes you look Nazi-adjacent.

              • arkie

                “Now if you keep insisting that the Canadian pair have been banned; and they’re not nazis, just racists; that people should listen to their arguements; you look like you are defending the content of the speech, rather than their freedom to express themselves. It makes you look Nazi-adjacent.”

                You are a piece work for sure. Id like to see you say that to my face. What an appalling grotesque comment to make after what I said earlier. Not so strangely from an ‘anonymous’ donor once again. Coward.

                • arkie

                  Paul

                  I was using the ‘you’ as in ‘one’ to refer to the Canadians and their defenders, not you specifically, I thought that was clear. let me rephrase it so you don’t feel so personally attacked.

                  Freedom of expression is not freedom from consequences. Constantly complaining you are under threat and being censored by ‘violent leftists’ doesn’t mean that people have to stop objecting to your opinions.

                  Now if (A person) keep insisting that the Canadian pair have been banned; and they’re not nazis, just racists; that people should listen to their arguements; (That person) looks like they are defending the content of the speech, rather than their freedom to express themselves. It makes (That person) look Nazi-adjacent.

                  • arkie
                    thanks for explaining more. I apologize and withdraw my comment.
                    However defending a persons right to be heard should never be allowed to be ‘equated’ with supporting their views what ever they are. This is a really important point.
                    I constantly found myself in the most invidious position of defending D Trumps right to be heard when in my 61 yrs of life have never given him more that 10 seconds air time before hitting off button on whatever device he appeared. After all the protests during the election I decided to listen to him speak live at one rally. Now that wouldn’t have happened if he hadn’t been so violently opposed and it applies for many others I know. v.v trump.

                    • arkie

                      However defending a persons right to be heard should never be allowed to be ‘equated’ with supporting their views what ever they are. This is a really important point.

                      But here we are again; these Canadians have not been stopped from being heard or sharing their opinions freely. This is the most important point. So when a person claims that they have been, at best, they don’t understand the situation and have been manipulated by LS SM et al’s perceived victimhood. It’s this victimhood that is their weapon; gets them mainstream media attention; gets liberal centrists to defend their ‘rights’ to promote the end of Liberalism.

                    • But arkie their Venue was cancelled. They were stopped weren’t they. I see your point tho.

                    • arkie

                      Paul,
                      They were stopped from selling tickets to a talk. They could have done it for free in a public space. My Freedom of speech doesn’t mean that I must be given a venue does it? Neither does theirs.

                    • mauī

                      They were banned from public venues and basically run out of town by the city’s high ranking officials, which would have influenced private venues no doubt. That doesn’t really scream “free speech” to me. Or hey you’re very welcome to stand on the street corner like the crazy guy ranting about God and we’ll provide tea and biscuits.

                    • arkie

                      mauī,
                      They are playing the victim here, they have their own youtube channels/website which really is the internet equivalent of standing on the street corner and yelling.

                • McFlock

                  I see Arkie’s response, and even if your understanding had been the intended message, how is it cowardly to say online rather than face to face? Why wouldn’t anyone say such things to your face out of fear?

                  It’s just words.

                  You’d simply respond with words, right?

                  Because it’s Arkie’s free speech to state their opinion of your political beliefs. None of us have anything to fear from each other, surely?

                  Even if we say something vile about you, you’d be like Hitchen and march for our freedom to do so?

                  • Mc Flock
                    “Even if we say something vile about you, you’d be like Hitchen and march for our freedom to do so?”

                    100% yes!

                    In the past cat debates on Gareth Morgans page Ive been threatened with everything imaginable . Even worse in 1080 debates .Someone once said they “would come cut my tail off “. I didnt want them banned but challenged them and gave them my address to come and try.
                    Admittedly I misunderstood arkies comment and apologized. Hope thats ok.

                    • McFlock

                      So if you’re cool with whatever someone says about you, why would they need any more courage to say it to you face to face than online?

            • McFlock 12.1.1.1.1.2

              It’s not about “vile”: Nazis/fascists (whether secular, Christian, Islamic or whatever) are an existential threat to everyone else.

              I think those two should have been stopped at the border. As it is they were allowed in the country and allowed to speak. People simply refused to provide them a platform, including for safety reasons.

              So nor is the court case about “freedom of speech”. They were never prevented from holding a public rally for free. They were unable to get other people to provide them a venue to help them monetise their speech. We’ll see how that court case comes out.

          • Paul Martinson 12.1.1.1.2

            McFlock
            you can watch Hitchens at length interview/ challenge a ‘white supremacist ‘ here. Quite interesting if not nauseating but that’s how to do it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7R-X1CXiI8

            • McFlock 12.1.1.1.2.1

              40 minutes? Meh.

              The ten second one of someone thumping Spencer is quicker and probably added as much to resolving the social conundrum that is how to maintain a free society while stopping nazis from gaining power.

              • McFlock
                The Sturmabteilung/brownshirts drowned my Schwiegermutters friend in the river in 1939 just because he was a socialist. That’s all /because of his political belief.

                your comment “The ten second one of someone thumping Spencer is quicker and probably added as much to resolving the social conundrum that is how to maintain a free society ..” is so reminiscent of those days/ beat your opposite to a pulp.

                • McFlock

                  The difference is that even in those days socialists didn’t believe in murdering people who werren’t exactly like them.

                  You think we can talk our way away from returning to those days. How’s that working for humanity so far? Got the supremacists and the assimilators on the run, have we?

        • joe90 12.1.1.2

          Bet he wouldn’t be banned from speaking by the mayor Auckland. Ugh

          Ya reckon.

          Sam Harris laughs along as Douglas Murray ridicules transgender people.If you're a Harris follower, how can you not be a Trump supporter? pic.twitter.com/X38CzUrdK2— Saeen (@_Saeen_) July 29, 2017

          Milo Yiannopoulos: 'Trans people are mentally ill'.Sam Harris: 'I don't see how Milo's views are bigoted'. pic.twitter.com/Rvz4AazUme— Saeen (@_Saeen_) August 2, 2017

          Milo Yiannopoulos: “In every meaningful way, the patriarchy favors women."Sam Harris: 'Milo is Jewish & Gay, so he can't be right-wing.' pic.twitter.com/hbbwIwhcsZ— Saeen (@_Saeen_) August 2, 2017

          In Sam Harris' new podcast with Gavin de Becker, he wants White women to know that they shouldn't get in an elevator with Black men. pic.twitter.com/zVjTWPRSPZ— Saeen (@_Saeen_) August 11, 2017

          […]

          Sam Harris has now moved on to blaming Antifa for violence committed by Nazis.Portrays Nazis as victims "Antifa goons". pic.twitter.com/vNkP0JBM1i— Saeen (@_Saeen_) August 23, 2017

          […]

          Sam Harris blames the rise of Nazism & White supremacism in America on minority rights movements. pic.twitter.com/zTpX7NooZA— Saeen (@_Saeen_) August 23, 2017

          https://twitter.com/_Saeen_/status/891409832665862145

    • Robert Guyton 12.2

      Why did Brash do that?
      Who knows what advantage he thought he’d gain; perhaps simply wanting to harm Phil Goff’s mayoral chances, who knows? Why was the PM silent on the issue? Good sense, perhaps, and maybe that “at home with a newborn” thing, who can say? The progressives had, I would suggest, enough commonsense to keep their own counsel where the two Canadian idiots (borrowed your term, thanks Paul) were concerned. Seems to me your views is lacks nuance; is that a conservative thing?

Leave a Comment

Show Tags

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Family Justice reforms experts announced
    Justice Minister Andrew Little has announced the full line up of the ‘Expert Reference Group’ to support the Independent Panel examining the 2014 family justice reforms. “I asked for highly qualified and experienced people because it’s critical that the panel ...
    22 hours ago
  • Canterbury tax relief, GST loophole closed
    Revenue Minister Stuart Nash has confirmed Parliament will extend tax relief for Canterbury businesses affected by issues relating to depreciation following the earthquakes. Mr Nash today introduced a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) to the Taxation (Annual Rates, Modernising Tax Administration, ...
    3 days ago
  • Hong Kong double tax agreement updated
    Revenue Minister Stuart Nash says New Zealand’s ability to detect and prevent tax evasion is enhanced by an update to our double tax agreement with Hong Kong which is now in force. The update to the 2010 double tax agreement ...
    5 days ago
  • Ngāti Rangi Settlement Bill passes first reading
    Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Hon Andrew Little, welcomed Ngāti Rangi to Parliament today to witness their Treaty settlement Bill pass its first reading. ...
    1 week ago
  • Pare Hauraki sign collective redress Deed
    ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Help us end conversion therapy
    It’s been so encouraging to see the strong support for banning conversion therapy in Aotearoa/New Zealand. I’m so impressed by the leadership being shown by the Young Greens and Young Labour on this. Green Party policy states our commitment to “reflecting ...
    GreensBy Jan Logie
    2 weeks ago
  • Panel appointed to re-write 2014 Family Court reforms
    Three experts have been appointed to an Independent Panel to examine the changes made to the family justice system in 2014 by the previous National Government, Justice Minister Andrew Little announced today. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Canterbury Earthquake Insurance Tribunal Bill introduced
    Justice Minister Andrew Little has introduced a Bill to help Cantabrians resolve outstanding residential insurance claims from the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes. ...
    2 weeks ago