Key’s Midas touch

17 comments on “Key’s Midas touch ”

• Comments are now closed

1. marsman 1

   11 June 2011 at 5:14 pm

   Key depriving NZ of everyting that really matters. His payoff no doubt comes aftert he’s been booted out, I wonder how rich he’ll be then.
2. Eddie 2

   11 June 2011 at 5:48 pm

   good point, r0b.

   Key’s ‘midas touch’ extends to precisely one thing – getting people to want to vote for him. Unfortunately, that’s a pretty important thing for the country’s future.

   But a few more polls in the right direction, and even Armstrong will be starting to wonder if the touch is fading.
3. jackal 3

   11 June 2011 at 6:01 pm

   It’s a common problem in that people often apply their own feelings about a person or thing onto everybody. This can often lead people to be deluded about the realities as Rob has so succinctly pointed out here. I believe Key’s continued popularity is somewhat due to him being a clown… Everybody loves a clown. When the next clown comes along, people wont like Shonkey’s old jokes much anymore.
4. Chris 4

   11 June 2011 at 6:45 pm

   More psychotic comments here again. The left need someone like Key instead of Mr. no personality Goff who’s popularity is in the margin of error- do people really think he will won the election for labour ? If you believe that some here are seriously deluded.
   • Craig Glen Eden 4.1

     11 June 2011 at 8:02 pm

     6 months is a very long time in politics Chris if you think this election will be easy for Key because he is up a against Goff, you are the one who is deluded. Key now has a history and its not exactly bright. All the economic figures are turning sour for Key and Blinglish( Mr 26%) Cunliffe will tear him to bits in an election campaign, Goff will be out pressing the flesh one on one and thats what he is good at. By the way not having a personality worked really well for one Jim Bolger.
     Infact Keys personality may be his biggest down fall Key Im so cocky looked like a dick up against Jacinda Ardern this week so I wouldnt go counting your chickens just yet MR Freud.
     • oscar 4.1.1

       12 June 2011 at 8:42 am

       akshually, blingish once got 20.2% for his party donsha know! I also have it on gpod authority (the pms mouth at an auckland bar) that key think he will remain above 49% all year, BUT his main worry is that act, uf, won’t get back, and mp won’t get enough seats to allow nats to break past 60 seats in a 122 seat parliament. Could we possibly end up with the first true minority goverment that doesn’t have a minority since what, ever?
5. Draco T Bastard 5

   11 June 2011 at 6:52 pm

   He might do well to reflect on the true moral of the Midas story.

   Wish everybody would then we might stop trying to turn everything into money.
6. tc 6

   11 June 2011 at 7:00 pm

   True the left could do with a bit more media savvy Delivery but this speaks volumes about where Armstrong pitches his tent.
   The simley wavey clown persona is a carefully crafted media image they hope to Blag another term with…..it’s what the hollow men do.
   Any reasonable assessment of fact combined with observation and research would leave an objective commentator to conclude anything but a Midas touch.
   Sadly for NZ Armstrong has plenty of MSM campers pitched up alongside.
7. Peter 7

   11 June 2011 at 8:51 pm

   “The issues on which he does succeed – selling useless budgets, tax cuts for the rich and the GST swindle – are those where most of the public have little interest, or where the media do the sales job for him.”

   He succeeds initially by giving half a story and bending the truth – eg “better of with tax cuts” sounds good but a bit of analysis shows something different. He knows he must con the the lower middle incomes to stay in power.
8. ianupnorth 8

   11 June 2011 at 9:19 pm

   The problem is people genuinely believe him; Armstrong said he could sell ice cubes to Eskimos – he probably could. It never ceases to amaze me that he can talk shit but go up in popularity.
    
   Is the population of New Zealand really that stupid?
   • Macro 8.1

     11 June 2011 at 9:29 pm

     yes
     • oscar 8.1.1

       12 June 2011 at 8:47 am

       it’s proven too. 80% of me-we’s think that the top tax bracket of 33% means you pay that tax rate on every dollar earnt.
       sadly, they refuse to believe the reality.
9. Penny Bright 9

   11 June 2011 at 10:20 pm

   errrr….. check out the only polls that really count – election (by-election) results and think again?

   How come in the ‘safe’ National seats encompassed by the Botany and Pakuranga electorates – there was only a 36% turnout in the Botany by-election and 30% turnout in the Howick by-election?

   How come in the Botany by-election more (former?) National Party voters stayed home (9000) than voted (8000) for National’s Jami-Lee Ross?

   Did you notice ACT received less than 700 votes in the Botany by-election?

   Where were the opinion polls that predicted THAT result prior to the election?

   Not a particularly good look for the National “A” Team, and National “B” (Bra$h) Team – hoping to put together the next ‘Rogernomic$ Coalition Government?

   Penny Bright
   http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
   • oscar 9.1

     12 June 2011 at 8:52 am

     the more i have to read ur incessant viarreah (verbal diarreah) the more I start to dislike your comments Penny. It’s almost as if you don’t actually make any points but post many non sequiters wrapped up in a question.
     This botany by election example is bunkum. By elections aren’t an indication of the real feeling at all.
     • Penny Bright 9.1.1

       12 June 2011 at 11:36 am

       “This botany by election example is bunkum. By elections aren’t an indication of the real feeling at all.”

       Really ‘oscar’?

       errrr…. silly me.

       I thought actual ELECTIONS are where the voting public actually decide who obtains public office?

       Perhaps you missed this analysis of the Botany by-election result by NZ Herald’s Chief Political Reporter – John Armstrong?

       http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10710626

       Botany byelection loss holds silver lining for Labour Party
       By John Armstrong
       5:30 AM Monday Mar 7, 2011

       At last, Phil Goff has something to smile about.

       Exactly why the Labour leader is smiling might not seem immediately obvious given that National’s Jami-Lee Ross won Saturday’s Botany byelection in a canter, securing almost double the number of votes of his Labour counterpart.

       The answer is that everything is relative in politics. Labour did better than it hoped. National did not fare as well as it would have expected.

       Of some worry to National will be the bleeding of its votes to the New Citizen Party, which picked up 10.5 per cent of the total candidate vote and pushed Act into fourth place.

       If replicated in electorates across Auckland with large populations of New Zealand Chinese, such splintering of centre-right support could see large piles of wasted votes if the new party fails to reach the 5 per cent threshold.

       That could diminish the centre-right’s representation in Parliament by one or two seats – seats which may well be crucial for National to retain power.

       It is questionable, however, how meaningful conclusions drawn from a byelection can be, let alone one as stifled by circumstances as this one.

       Still, the debut of the New Citizen Party and National’s failure to lift its vote would seem to pour cold water on the possibility of National securing a majority alone.

       The complicating factor is Saturday’s abysmally low turnout. However, the non-vote would more likely be weighted in Labour’s favour.

       The 36.6 per cent turnout – half that of a general election – meant both major parties got fewer votes than at the 2008 election. Labour’s vote proved more robust. National’s vote halved from more than 17,000 to just over 8000. In comparison, Labour’s vote fell, but far less dramatically – from around 6500 to just over 4000.
       ___________________________________________

       In my considered opinion, as a candidate in that by-election, it proved that campaigning on the issues – particularly against asset sales – was politically effective.

       (Former?) National party voters get a power bill every month, and know full well that applying the ‘competitive’ model to a natural monopoly such as the supply of electricity – just duplicates resources – sets up a multiplicity of profit-making empires – and causes power prices to go up – not down.

       It is also my considered opinion that the way that ‘democracy’ works in New Zealand tends to operate according to the ‘Golden Rule’ – ‘those who have the gold – make the rules’, and we tend to get the government that the majority of big business want us to have.

       This is achieved through mainstream media manipulation of ‘public opinion’.

       In my view, the Botany by-election results caused quite some consternation, as it was realised that asset sales were NOT a vote-winner.

       So – the tactic used was to try and undermine the main political party with the stated position of opposing asset sales – the Labour Party – particularly by attacking Phil Goff’s leadership.

       In my view – it was realised that National were not going to get the numbers to govern alone. As ACT under Rodney Hide’s leadership was looking unlikely to regain Epsom or the 5% Party vote threshold.

       Remember – the ACT candidate in the Botany by-election got less than 700 votes.

       “As for Act, Rodney Hide may not know whether to laugh or cry.
       The party’s candidate, Lyn Murphy, got 671 votes. ”

       http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10710626

       Next panicky move?

       The Bra$h ACT takeover – which appears to have seriously backfired.

       Given that the personnel and policies of National and ACT are so readily interchangeable, there is essentially no real difference between them.

       National and ACT are the National “A” Team and National “B” (Bra$h) Team.

       A vote for John is a vote for Don.
       A vote for Don is a vote for John.

       A vote for either of them is a vote for more ‘Rogernomic$’.

       The more ‘shonky’ John Key is exposed as leading the corporate raid on New Zealand – (once a corporate raider – always a corporate raider?) – the more I believe that National will plummet in the polls.

       John Key’s forced smile will look more strained and phoney and his eyes will look more hollow as the spin-doctored ‘ordinary bloke’ mask continues to slip………..

       Penny Bright
       http://waterpressure.wordpress.com
10. ianupnorth 10

    12 June 2011 at 3:46 pm

    I am being deafened by Oscar’s silence….

Links to post

1. The Standard: ‘Key’s Midas touch – Selling asset sales is a hard job even for Key’ + my comments « The Watchdog: posted on 12 June 2011 at 12:01 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS