Mt Albert date set

34 comments on “Mt Albert date set ”

• Comments are now closed

1. ripp0 1

   20 April 2009 at 5:25 pm

   good thing the 13th is not a Friday…wot!

   And mebbe setting the smiles is this one for door-knocked computer types to go get.. 🙂
   • John M 1.1

     20 April 2009 at 11:58 pm

     Greetings from Austin TX and (me) Maritime Canada! We don’t often get so many incomings from NZ, especially from a political post. That being said, we do follow housing and financial trends your way, so if you’ve got insight please drop us a line.

     Meanwhile, enjoy your free bank 😉
2. the sprout 2

   20 April 2009 at 5:38 pm

   No surprise they’re leaving it as late as possible – Key’s hoping people will have forgotten the upcoming Black Budget and the Hikoi on May 25
   • Monty 2.1

     20 April 2009 at 6:12 pm

     The black budget that is necessary because of the terrible books and debts left by Michael Cullen??

     I am looking forward to this budget as it is the first step in the recovery of NZ. Bill English has the perfect excuse to start undoing all the policies of nine years of Labour. Great News!
     • r0b 2.1.1

       20 April 2009 at 7:20 pm

       Way to look like a fool Monty. Everybody knows Cullen spent 9 years paying off debt, and left us in a good position going in to this crisis. A crisis which has the Nats frozen like a possum in the headlights.
     • mickysavage 2.1.2

       20 April 2009 at 8:30 pm

       Monty

       Labour lost the slogan battle, “a decade of deficits” and “wasting the best economic conditions”.

       I prefer reality:

       1. Lowest unemployment levels since the 70s
       2. Crown debt is now miniscule
       3. Kiwisaver and the CULLEN fund.

       Why does this debate involve you and your ilk throwing slogans and us coming back with facts?

       Any facts you would like to throw into the debate?

       I bet you say that productivity has gone down. I have the perfect remedy for that. Just make 100,000 unemployed and productivity levels ought to soar. Shame about our communities …
3. lprent 3

   20 April 2009 at 5:46 pm

   It was either to try and get it in before the budget May 27th on May 23 (unlikely as it would push the boundaries of electoral speed a bit much). Or to go a while after the budget.

   May 30 is 3 days after the budget.. And it will be a horror budget. It wouldn’t be that safe even with their vastly increased PR machine wound up (you remember the spin doctor stories from last year – the didn’t diminish the number of the cost – they increased it).

   June 6th is Queens birthday weekend,

   June 13th is the earliest feasible.
4. Scribe 4

   20 April 2009 at 5:51 pm

   Just a correction. Queen’s Birthday is on June 1 this year, so it’s the weekend of May 30.

   Also (and I know the quote above is from another source), how hard is it to spell “by-election”? The transcript from yesterday’s Q&A makes the same mistake.
   • the sprout 4.1

     20 April 2009 at 5:53 pm

     “bi-election”

     maybe they’re going to elect two people?
     • Rex Widerstrom 4.1.1

       20 April 2009 at 8:32 pm

       No, you’re going to have to make out with Judith Collins and Parekura Horomia to prove you’re qualified.

       For the love of all that’s holy don’t the media (and Newsroom’s been round long enough, has editors and Gallery accredition etc so it qualifies) have any standards?

       It’s not a hard one. Bicycle. Biped. Biannual. Even bloody bisexual are all clues.

       *flounces away to fume impotently*
       • the sprout 4.1.1.1

         20 April 2009 at 9:40 pm

         excellent Rex.
         incidentally ‘bisexual’ is a contraction of the original form ‘ambisexual’, as in ‘ambivalent’, not ‘2 sexes’ as commonly thought. still has the bi=2 root, but one further step removed. after JC and PH i’d feel something less than ambivalent myself.
5. gobsmacked 5

   20 April 2009 at 6:09 pm

   Labour need to concentrate on their own PR machine.

   By-election basics: message of the day, smart soundbites, visuals for the TV news, every single day of the campaign. They should have worked out by now (and National certainly have) that the under-resourced journos are there to be fed. So feed them.

   Although I’m not a party member, I would be happy to help out with the donkey work. But I’m not going to be the infantry for generals who don’t know how to win a war. And let’s face it, Labour’s election machine has been pretty ropey of late.

   If I see waffly, windswept TV clips that say “1970’s amateurs with socks that don’t match”, I’ll find better things to do with my time.

   Anyone know who’s running Labour’s campaign?
   • dad4justice 5.1

     20 April 2009 at 6:43 pm

     A wee birdy told me that Crusty the Clown has the job.
     • BLiP 5.1.1

       20 April 2009 at 7:12 pm

       That’s funny – the same wee birdy told me Monty was going to be running National’s tilt at the windmills.
       • archdupe 5.1.1.1

         20 April 2009 at 7:27 pm

         Well at least Labour won’t be using Mike Williams.
         • Pascal's bookie 5.1.1.1.1

           20 April 2009 at 8:15 pm

           I heard higherstandard has been sniffing around. But I don’t think he’s the man for the job.
         • mickysavage 5.1.1.1.2

           20 April 2009 at 8:23 pm

           I must admit getting really tired of this. Mike campaign managed three successful general elections. I bet no-one else has had this success rate in New Zealand’s history.

           He gets criticised for going to Aussie to chase up a lead. Wow, there is a lead that suggests that JK may have been involved in a criminal action. Of course Mike should not do a thing and refuse to accept that this may have happened.

           His only mistake was that someone else should have gone over. The difference is ???

           I think that NZ got sucked into the right wing hatchet job on our best and brightest.

           And the Owen Glen stuff, well I am more than happy for Owen Glen and the 20 Owen Glens who support the National party to be taken out of the equation. State funding for political parties anyone?
         • archdupe 5.1.1.1.3

           20 April 2009 at 8:52 pm

           Perhaps Pascal’s bookie might be the man for the job ?

           Edit Micky … Mike Williams our best and brightest ! …. FFS we really are in trouble.
         • Tim Ellis 5.1.1.1.4

           20 April 2009 at 10:14 pm

           But Micky, Mike Williams didn’t just do that, did he? He went around telling everybody that he had a neutron bomb on John Key. He worked the Press Gallery with this explosive information, before he had it. Somebody, clearly close to the Labour Party president, was playing cloak and dagger stuff by posing as Batman, and leaking information to the media, which turned out to be 100% false.

           Labour then framed its entire election campaign around negative campaigning–not one single positive advertisement–and said that John Key couldn’t be trusted. All of this was designed to coincide with the detonation of the neutron bomb that didn’t exist.

           That was not just following up a lead. That was in my view the most disastrous campaign by a New Zealand political party since I don’t remember when.

           I agree Mike Williams had three great campaigns for Labour. But he will only be remembered for the last one in my view.

           I think the public generally have a much more charitable view of Helen Clark, because she generally lead New Zealand well for nine years.
       • ripp0 5.1.1.2

         20 April 2009 at 7:48 pm

         “windmills” is it..?

         Having watched a big campaign run by ruskie oscar homulka in war and piece at the weekend ( bloody awful acting for the most part (herbie lom as napoleon being the best of the crop on display) ) I’d say by the time the blues hit rain, ice and snow they’ll have no way to go… but a determined dip at the river..

         else, looking forward to a more classical outcome.. of which willie shakespeare at the weekend could have significant merits.. there is something to be looked forward for… eh..
         • BLiP 5.1.1.2.1

           20 April 2009 at 8:54 pm

           In an attempt to be equally obscure:

           nae canny as wee robbie but that upstart crow Johannes factotum best described the blue campaign a walking shadow and nothing’s as sweet as an adversary’s due fate when classic

           aside, oscar, methinks, twas viennese; I never saw him or herbie, I’d eyes only for funny face.
       • ripp0 5.1.1.3

         21 April 2009 at 1:22 pm

         thank ye for the assist Blip—wonderful diversion that it proved to be.. (no one so far has picked up the single letter point of that verbal display — 😉

         btw: viennese.. oscar was a turk playing a turk in one of those James Bond movies years later, as I recall..
   • lprent 5.2

     21 April 2009 at 8:06 am

     I’m doing a lot of work on the systems for the campaign legwork. Been doing that for the last 15 years or so, so they are pretty damn effective.
6. dad4justice 6

   20 April 2009 at 6:40 pm

   “Anyone know who’s running Labour’s campaign?”

   A wee bird told me Crusty the Clown has the job.
   • The Baron 6.1

     20 April 2009 at 7:51 pm

     Saying it twice doesn’t make it any less lame, D4J.

     Anyway, I’m pretty sure he’s Krusty, by the way. FAIL.
7. jarbury 7

   20 April 2009 at 8:05 pm

   I guess we’ll know what National’s proposals regarding the Waterview Connection will be by then. I wonder if we’ll get some polls on Mt Albert soon. I guess that will happen shortly after the candidates are chosen – will be interesting to see how much the Greens split the centre-left vote. That’s National’s only chance here, so it’s no wonder people like David Farrar are talking up the Greens’ prospects in Mt Albert.
   • The Baron 7.1

     20 April 2009 at 8:07 pm

     Though ACT are also supposedly revving up a party machine there, which means that the right vote will be split was well…
8. gobsmacked 8

   20 April 2009 at 8:16 pm

   Baron

   Yes, and that’s a perfect example of how the Nats’ spinners are making the running, while Labour continues its post-election nap. A Green candidate is no more (or less) likely to affect the outcome than an ACT candidate. But only one of these stories is getting media traction.

   ACT is an interesting sidebar here. They will capitalise on “law n’order” issues, which can generate a sizeable protest vote, and pull immigrant/ethnic votes away from the two main parties. But the more they sound like Garrett, and less like Douglas, the more they annoy their base.

   I’d pick ACT to do well (i.e. third) if they go hard for it … unless there’s a backroom deal with the Nats to play nice.
9. Phil 9

   21 April 2009 at 9:38 am

   Tim,

   It was still nothing on the 1999 National campaign “It’s time for a change”.
   • Tim Ellis 9.1

     21 April 2009 at 10:17 am

     I missed that one Phil. Have you got a reference to say that was the national party theme in 1999?
10. George Darroch 10

    21 April 2009 at 11:35 am

    The Greens will fail to perform to their expectations because they don’t have the systems in place that lprent is working on now – a strong electorate committee, supporter databases, coordinated electorate strategies, and importantly the experience of fighting hundreds of electorate campaigns. I’ve been telling the Greens to do this for key seats for years, and every time get told – ‘we don’t do electorates, we’re after the list vote’. Their loss really, as they could win with the right people in the right electorates.
    • lprent 10.1

      21 April 2009 at 12:04 pm

      We actually fight for the party vote really hard – through the electorate campaigns. The key is to get your supporters out and voting.

      I’d agree that the greens really need to get down at that grass level co-ordinated campaigning. The polls generally show them higher than their actual results. The probability is that they failed to get their support to vote. We certainly never see much ground level effort by the greens. They seem to prefer meetings of the faithful and national message campaigns. But the grassroots level is important to doing the persuasion carrying support outside of the young and idealistic as their voters age.

      I’ve always helped to bias our campaigns to help the greens as well as us on turnout, as happens in a number of electorates. Don’t think that I’ll bother from here on out.
      • George Darroch 10.1.1

        21 April 2009 at 12:47 pm

        “We certainly never see much ground level effort by the greens. They seem to prefer meetings of the faithful and national message campaigns.”

        Their last two campaign managers were terrible in that regard – Russell Norman and Gary Reese are both good people, but they simply had no idea how to create a campaign that made as many ‘contacts’ with the average person as possible, and thought that a narrowly focused campaign that preached to the core (the ‘Grey Lynn professionals’ and ‘GE mothers’) was the way to go. They had the resources to do much better.

        I hope, for everybody’s sake they get people who know what they’re doing next time.

        I reckon everybody should be taking lessons from the Obama campaign, not to replace but to supplement the experience and knowledge they have. Which is to say that you can’t do well without human contact, and that organising people, and creating a sense of purpose matters.
11. The Voice of Reason 11

    21 April 2009 at 11:35 am

    I’m pretty sure it wasn’t National’s slogan in ’99. They were in power, after all!

    They did use it unsuccesfully in the ’46 post war election and Labour stormed to power under Big Norm in ’72 using the same concept. In both those cases and the most recent election, the incumbent party had been there for 3 terms or more, so I guess it will resurface in 15 or so years as voters tire of the Goff government.

    Ok … the Little Government.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS