Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
5:30 pm, September 27th, 2023 - 68 comments
Categories: Daily review -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
TV1 poll tonight:
Lab 26 Gr 13 TPM 2
Nat 36 ACT 12
NZF 6
It's 41-48 if NZF doesn't get 5%. It's still close enough to be in doubt-I don't believe TPM is on only 2%. The Greens continue to rise. Go Hipkins tonight in the debate.
Absolutely BG. Still there to be won.
First 15min of Leader's Debate Newshub. Hipkins is well ahead on points. The audience laughed at Luxons loose replies. He couldn't get away with his usual bluster. Law gangs so far. Chippy alive!
Just turned off the "leaders!!" debate, an absolute gabblefest. Only certainty is that Gower is a bumbling idiot.
Reinforces the decision not to vote.
Did you notice that Luxon is getting agitated, breathing faster because Paddy and CH are holding to Lux answer. eg How many people will loose their jobs under the Nat cull? Lux can only spill his lines but after 3 asks no answer, again.
Must be why you turned off Johnr.
I noticed a few instances where Luxon bordered on agitation /anger. It seems the image he’s trying to cultivate – amiable, magnanimous, the voice of reason, the slightly underdog “I’ve never debated before” (demonstrated to be a falsehood) nice guy- slipped somewhat tonight.
ianmac, in answer to the number of job losses in the Public Service, Luxon said,
"I don't know" and I think he doesn't care.
@ ianmac (3.1) … yes, I did notice how Luxon was getting agitated, when Chippy and Paddy were pushing him.
Can you imagine Luxon as PM, with Seymour on one side and Peters on the other side, leaning on him? I don't think he would be able to handle things too well somehow, considering how he was getting flustered with Hipkins and Gower.
A great performance from Chippy last night
Luxons cassette tape has finally worn too thin………the heads are worn and the white noise is painful..
Watched an item on TV1 news re- todays press conference where Hipkins and Robertson released their fiscal costings. I watched it live and was impressed with the clear and concise explanations from both of them. It had the ring of truth about them and had been examined by Infometrics who backed up their claims.
After a brief excerpt of Robertson, the item crossed to Nicola Willis for a response. I have no qualms in stating she is the most dishonest woman politician I have seen. She tries to pass herself as compassionate and genuine. She is a thoroughly nasty piece of work and I make no apologies for saying so.
See for yourself:
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/shows/one-news-at-6pm
The item starts at around 21:12 mins.
Perhaps the rot started at the top; Mr Luxon. I think they are both dishonest. Maybe why their vote is fading given that watchers are beginning to see through them.
Quite the business model; charge losers $499/month to by-pass consent safeguards and harass unsuspecting women.
If you get a message from someone you never matched with on Tinder, it's not a glitch — it's part of the app's expensive new subscription plan that it teased earlier this year, which allows "power users" to send unsolicited messages to non-matches for the small fee of $499 per month.
As Bloomberg reports, the new VIP subscription tier, the highest of the company's new "Tinder Select" service, does come with an important caveat: it will only be offered to fewer than one percent of the app's user base, and even they'll have to apply in addition to paying the enormous subscription cost.
https://futurism.com/the-byte/tinder-select-rizzless
Sept 27: Chris Hipkins starts to fight the election campaign. Unfortunately 8 months late.
He exposed Luxon's emptiness in that debate: a constant repetition of "Let me be clear" and "Have a look at", not being clear at all.
Hipkins had quick wits, Luxon had a script. In a Presidential election there would only be one winner, but this isn't. Instead, it was a preview of a fraud PM who will suddenly have to make decisions, confront reality, and explain to voters … things he is incapable of.
God help us.
Yeah – a bit of a bloodbath. Felt like an actual sentient human being versus a C-suite robot programmed some time in the early 1990's by undergraduate right-wing Comp Sci students and repeating scripted lines. Let's hope it makes a difference.
Josie Pagani, sounding like Luxons roadie, should have gone out and changed his cassette tape for a fresh one during one of the ad breaks…….
Anytime I see Josie Pagani, the supposed left wing commentator, alarm bells sound. She has spent the last six years attacking Labour and fangirling National.
Its been going on longer than six years. I think it started around 2011/12 when David Shearer was leader. Nothing to do with him as far as I know, but the party lost faith in both Josie and her spouse John Pagani. They effectively dumped them and Josie Pagani has had it in for Labour since. I don't know why the MSM use her, because she rarely has anything of substance to say.
Thank you for that information Anne, it really puts things in context and perspective.
At a years ago previous Election, I wondered who Josie Pagani was? As she was being touted as a "from the left" commentator ? Not having heard of her before…it really didnt seem much like !
I asked on the Standard…and Patricia Bremner gave me a heads up.
: )
She is a great friend of Jenna Lynch.. say no more!!
Laughter is a very good test, because unlike keyboard responses (social media, and us on here) it is not filtered. We can't spin an instinctive response, it's genuine.
The audience were laughing at Luxon. And not in a good way.
e.g. Gower asking "Judith Collins or Winston Peters?" to Luxon, and he couldn't even answer that! Cue Hipkins, on form: "But she's on your team!". Laughter.
observer- you’re spot on- spontaneous reactions speak volumes, and the audience reaction to Luxon’s blatant disloyalty to his own team member (Collins) was telling. It’s evident that Luxon is ruthless and would sell out his own team members at the drop of a hat.
Note that despite the Michael Woods debacle, the audience didn’t laugh when Hipkins expressed loyalty to Woods. Loyalty counts for a lot and is a reflection of personal integrity, something Luxon seems to come up short on.
AB your comment is hilarious and apt.
100% AB
Hipkins still looked worried though. I agree he scored some good points. The thing gelled after about 20/30 mins and Gower worked some magic via goodwill, so we got audience resonance naturally & that made the two leaders relaxed & friendly.
Which would have irritated many rightists, given how much common ground they agreed too! Luxon surprised me by doing way better than the first debate – came across authentic after that initial awkward stage. I bet any undecideds who made up their mind fell his way tonight. The panel verdicts were interesting but I disagreed with their consensus: they reckoned Hipkins did better on points.
Still seems to me that Labour never got enough runs on the board this term & only the flakey con-man image of Lux can save them – which didn't really show up tonite…
Seriously? What actual, factual answers did Luxon give?
When Hipkins chided him for never answering a question, the audience laughed. Because they knew it.
Yeah. The one about not knowing Winston was a classic! He meant personally, which was a valid point, but failed to say so & therefore looked a fool.
I wouldn't cite any factual answers from Luxon even if he gave some. His demeanor was the difference in this debate. He was happy, assured, confident, knowing he's already a winner. I'm not saying he's right – we don't know that yet & I still think it's more likely to be a moot outcome on election night.
Hipkins did what he ought to have done in the first debate, but probably insufficient to make a difference now. A game-changer could be if Luxon's facade slips on the finance thing…
That was about the only thing that did turn up! Luxon is a salesman, mouthing slogans and platitudes and saying whatever necessary to make a sale. He's as shallow as a puddle after 10 minutes of drizzle!
And Chippie quite rightly pulled him up on some of his non answers!
I agree re non-answers & shallow but in a debate style matters and he brought his A game into play after the first half-hour. Mainstreamers are always conned by a smooth operator and that's where the numbers are.
Dennis-defeatist posts like yours are not helping anyone.
Tell me, do you really think Labour has done a bad job in this term compared with what Nats/ACT/NZF are saying they will will do in the next term if they win?
If the answer is no then stop slagging Labour off.
Better to be realistic though (not defeatist). I think the rightist troika is likely to be a shit-show. Re your third point, the only way the left will ever learn from poor performance is by trying to. Retreat into denial never works.
Dennis-it is your "poor performance" assessment that I, and most people on TS, don't accept.
Covid, two cyclones and the Ukranian war have been massive challenges that this government has dealt with well. But obviously these massive issues have impacted on economic performance.
I respect your personal opinion on that. I agree that those 4 factors are valid points in favour of Labour. The problem is that folks generally don't see it that way, according to the poll trend, which has seen an inexorable tide go out on Labour ever since they rightly got a landslide win last time.
Re impact on the economy, yeah but no recession anyway & you think that impresses those floaters? Mood shifts in the masses are ephemeral.
Has he been preoccupied or did he think he had to be restrained and priministerial? Is it too late to break the media conviction that it's the nats' turn?
"Abortion tantamount to..murder." Chris Luxon…
He never did retract that.
Aye BG. Was a bit of a standout….for worse
I wouldn't give it to Hipkins so quickly. It's say he bolstered spirits, but wouldn't have necessarily gained a heap of undecideds. His high voice made him seem a little whiny at times too, sad that's that's even an issue these days.
Luxon was surprisingly resilient to Chippy's hassles, even if his blathering didn't answer any questions.
I agree if Chippy had shown a bit more of this mongrel earlier it could have woken up a few more swingers.
High whiny voice? wtf ? Strange comment
Roy, what an odd, petty little comment. You’re clearly trying to start some sort of BS narrative about Hipkins’ voice. Come on, surely you can do better than that?!
Roy is pointing out that perception matters.
And it is Roys ..perception. And a fucking strange one at that.
Sure, but whose perception is that? Roy’s?
"…sad that's that's even an issue these days."
The voice of Nicola Willis drives me mental. I cannot listen to her pathetic blathering. That is my perception.
Ditto !!
Its that somewhat coarse version of the Kiwi accent that grates on me, but maybe I am biased. My English mother brought us up to speak 'naicly' with varying amounts of success.
To be fair, Ginny Anderson's accent also grates on me.
I'm not trying to 'start something' but if these things are to be judged like talent shows, that's how he came across to me.
It's the case with these 'presidential' debates. Their likeability is under the microscope.
I don't give a shit about how they look or sound (I prefer to decide on policy), like I said, I wish it didn't matter. I'm trying to see it like a tv show audience might.
Roy, while I understand the notion of trying to view the debate in terms of how a TV audience might view it, it doesn’t follow that something you have perceived is in fact a reality for anyone else.
Fair enough, it probably doesn't help to rag on him just when he's perking up either.
I should have said, he definitely won the debate side, not convinced about the 'talent show' aspect.
Anyway, I'm in the minority, thank goodness.
Thank you Roy for your reply
Grace Petrie singing 'Farewell To Welfare' This is the future if the left don't win.
And we've got a recession to beat
Let's put more money into the monarchy and a millionaire in Downing Street
And someone's got to foot the bill
Let's start with the disabled and the mentally ill
Hipkins came across really well in tonight’s debate- his integrity, strength of character, directness, and decisiveness came through.
Luxon on the other hand presented as slippery, evasive, condescending, equivocating, and with an unfortunate habit of lapsing into speeches when brief answers were required.
Hipkins won the debate by a mile!
Well said Sapphire. Great summary!
Onya, SapphireGem ! IMO Chris Hipkins ran rings around Luxon…had him on the ropes..several times. Luxon, when up against it…was lost.
There was an interesting sad moment during the review before 9pm. An older couple were there to ask what could be done to their wrecked farm after the storms. Trees and rubbish from plantations needed actions. They said that Labour were useless and that they hadn't fixed the problems. Luxon had visited and he was going to look into the matter. Labour made them sour. Luxon will fix it all. Really?
ianmac- I feel very sorry for this couple as they have been through a hellish experience and are clearly desperate. It’s so cheap of Luxon to capitalise on their misfortune. As Hipkins said, you can’t just shut down a forestry company and leave the trees unharvested. As usual, Hipkins gave the intelligent response whereas Luxon went with the easy, cheap, expedient answer. Typical.
The woman in that couple had venom for Labour dripping from every word. Labour had provided 'nothing' in support for them after Gabrielle. Groundswell attitude. I'd never expect that type to acknowledge the $1B support provided for the regions affected by that disaster.
Hmm, for sure "some" would have an attack Labour agenda…and what better place than national tv to air that?
Really.. what was Chris Hipkins to say to them? "Heres, have some free money?" IMO he gave the best response. As SapphireGem at # 12.1
Setting aside the nightmare they have been through and are still going through, I think you will find they were never supporters of the Labour Party.
Paddy asked about a big health issue: bowel cancer.
But nothing about a bigger health issue: Dental health.
Why?
Would having someone suffering from poor dental health care, in the audience and being interviewed afterwards, be too shocking
Prime Minister Hipkins by a country mile. Luxon was flummoxed most of the time and had to resort to inanities. ‘ I feel like I should give you a hug’ to PM. because he was down in the quagmire. Absolute idiot.
He's been watching some of Muldoon's debates for inspiration. Mind you the last one Muldoon ever did came back to haunt him when he said after Lange had given him one of his brilliant broadsides "and I love you too". It marked the beginning of the end of Muldoon.
We enjoyed the debate. Chris Hipkins clearly won. I think this may be a pivotal point. It follows the excellent presentation of the fiscal plan today. More of this.
I wholeheartedly agree Patricia.
please fix the typo in your email address so you don’t get caught in the spam filter.
Apologies weka- has it come through properly this time?
After the debate Luxon seemed assured before media, the thinking/instruction clearly was that he merely had to remain composed and on message as he was ahead on points – the polls.
He's developing his capacity to blather reassurance while presiding over poor policy design (it is of course to cater to privilege, not be good for New Zealand as a society or as a functioning modern nation state).