Whambulance needed for P North Nats

Written By: - Date published: 12:30 pm, April 16th, 2011 - 23 comments
Categories: blogs, democratic participation, humour - Tags: , , ,

National’s Palmerston North candidate, Leonie Hapeta, is having a cry because the Labour MP, Iain Lees-Galloway, and supporters had an anti-asset sales demonstration that happened to be outside her hotel. It’s one thing for a n00b like Hapeta to cry about politics but surprising that Farwhaa and Wail-oil joined her.

I mean how ridiculously precious do you have to be to go outside and complain when your opponent has an event outside your workplace, like Hapeta did? Should we only protest where and when it won’t offend your delicate sensibilities Leonie?

If you can’t handle a dozen people with ‘stop asset sales’ signs, you’re going to be in real trouble come the debates. But I guess you’ll probably take the typical National route and refuse to take part in the debates, eh?

The real laugh is David Farrar and Cameron Slater coming out to defend poor little Leonie from what they term the ‘nasty politics’ of Lees-Galloway and co having a wee protest in a public place.

The pair of them set the standard in nasty politics in this country.

Anyone remember Farrar putting up billboards around the country comparing Helen Clark to dictators? (he’s been pretty silent on the new law that actually makes Gerry Brownlee our dictator)

And don’t forget the dangerously unhinged Slater – who posts about weapons and his violence fantasies when not launching vicious (but ineffectual) attacks on anyone who even slightly crosses him.

These two virtually in tears because of a little protest, what a hoot – someone fetch the whambulance for Farwhaa and Wail-oil.

M from PN

23 comments on “Whambulance needed for P North Nats ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. kerry 1
    16 April 2011 at 1:13 pm

    Irony is Slater calling someone else out as a liar

    • Lanthanide 1.1
      16 April 2011 at 1:24 pm

      That’s not ironic, because it’s expected.

      The word you wanted was “hypocrisy”.

  2. deemac 2
    16 April 2011 at 2:04 pm

    says something about the calibre of Nat candidates. Has no-one explained to her that sign-waving is a common sight in NZ elections? Possibly not, given that the Nats don’t have enough members to do this sort of campaigning!
    It reminds me of those old comedies where a rich knob shouts “get orf my land!”. Maybe she thinks she owns the pavements too? Hilarious.

  3. todd 3
    16 April 2011 at 2:30 pm

    Bullies are usually cowards when it really comes down to it.

  4. Tigger 4
    16 April 2011 at 2:30 pm

    Congrats to the PN team for turning out to protest. Will sponsor some more signs purely because of Farrar and Oil’s whining.

  5. Peter 5
    16 April 2011 at 4:56 pm

    What a brilliant, cost-effective, grassroots campaign. Congratulations to all concerned, more please!

    • Rex Widerstrom 5.1
      16 April 2011 at 6:54 pm

      Actually I’d sugegst it’s neither brilliant nor cost-effective (because it’s not effective at all, thus any cost is wasted). Not just this particular activity but the whole standing-at-the-roadside-with-a-sign. Or indeed a sign at all – who ever changed their vote on the basis of seeing a corflute? Or dozens of corflutes?

      “Well gosh, I was going to vote for Reginald Strip-Mining, but now I’ve seen all those nice red signs I think I’ll back that nice Ms Tofu Bean-Sandwich”. Hardly.

      When I was campaigning I told Winston if he was that keen to see pictures of himself Photoshopped beside me all over Hamilton / Ohariu he could put them up himself… and more to the point, pay for them, as we had little enough cash as it was.

      That being said, if these young people think that emulating a pizza store promoter is going to win votes for their candidate, they have every right to stand on a thoroughfare and wave to their little hearts’ content. What absolute silliness to see conspiracy where there is simply an abundance of enthusiasm.

      • Tigger 5.1.1
        16 April 2011 at 7:44 pm

        I think those of us who breathe in the heady fumes of politics daily forget that some people out there don’t know who the PM is, let alone who their local candidates are.  Plus Rex, not all candidates have whopping wads of cash for advertising campaigns, some have to rely on volunteers waving signs at intersections…

        • Rex Widerstrom 5.1.1.1
          16 April 2011 at 10:15 pm

          I think those of us who breathe in the heady fumes nauseating stench of politics daily

          FIFY 😀

          not all candidates have whopping wads of cash for advertising campaigns, some have to rely on volunteers waving signs at intersections…

          I’ve had it justified to me in the past on the basis that it’s “brand awareness”. That presupposes people care who the candidate is, as opposed to focusing solely on the performance of his or her leader and party in these increasingly presidential times.

          I’d like to think they did, but sadly in most seats the old donkey-with-a-ribbon-on-it adage holds true. In which case, IMHO, the corflute can be left to the real estate agents.

          A good candidate can make a difference but they need to either spend a lot of money communicating why they’re better than their opponent, or get out there and sell themselves retail, door-to-door.

          • PeteG 5.1.1.1.1
            17 April 2011 at 8:02 am

            I find placard waving generally very corny and ignore it like I would happy clappers. I may not be their target demographic but I don’t see traffic stopping to admire the signs – most drivers should be concentrating on driving.
             
            In any case it’s such a vague campaign in a location that’s got nothing to do with it it’s hardly going to swing many votes.
             
            Another problem with placard demonstrating is it can look like a picket or union demonstration. If IL-G wants to reinforce the perception of an obvious union connection to the campaign he’s as likely to get negative brand recognition.

            • mickysavage 5.1.1.1.1.1
              17 April 2011 at 8:17 am

              it’s such a vague campaign in a location that’s got nothing to do with it it’s hardly going to swing many votes.

              Bullsh*t PeteG.

              It is a significant campaign on an issue that most Kiwis are really concerned about and it is starting to resonate.

              • PeteG …
                17 April 2011 at 8:24 am

                What if Labour do manage to succeed in raising the “fear of asset sale” level, then National release a relatively benign small scale partial sale policy and people think “what the heck was the Labour hoo-ha about”?
                 
                I know it’s possible the oversell campaign will work, after all Macdonalds advertise “you’re loving it” and all you get is a bland burger and more cardboard (branded of course) than chips but I think the voters are much more into lazy food this far from an election.
                 
                Has any research been done on the effectiveness of placard waving demonstrations?

                • felix …
                  17 April 2011 at 8:30 am

                  What if Labour do manage to succeed in raising the “fear of asset sale” level,
                   

                  Nah, kiwis are already against it wholeheartedly. Labour just needs to show they’re with them.
                   

                  then National release a relatively benign small scale partial sale policy and people think “what the heck was the Labour hoo-ha about”?
                   

                  Can’t speak for Labour but I’d count that as a bit of a win.

            • felix 5.1.1.1.1.2
              17 April 2011 at 8:20 am

              In any case it’s such a vague campaign in a location that’s got nothing to do with it it’s hardly going to swing many votes.
               

              This campaign is relevant everywhere. And it’s not vague at all, it’s a very simple clear message.
               
              Kiwis don’t want their assets sold out from under them and if Labour have their wits about them they’ll keep this campaign visible not just on the street corners but in the shops, in the workplaces, in the pubs, in the arts, and in the communities of ordinary kiwis.
               
              And that’s what Pete’s so scared of. Read between his lines.

              edit: what micky said 😉

              • PeteG …
                17 April 2011 at 8:36 am

                I’m not scared of anything. Labour should be scared of dippy campaigns that fizzle and that do nothing to make them look like a government-in-waiting. To me they come across as immature amateurs.
                 
                I’m not sure yet if the asset sale proposals National has floated make economic sense or not, I suspect they are so cautious it wouldn’t make much difference either way. Trying to portray it as the tip of a selling all of New Zealand iceberg to rich mates overseas is pathetic. It’s crying wolf when the worst that’s likely to happen is seagulls scavenging a bit.
                 
                There are a heck of a lot more important issues than a possible handful of part sales. Aren’t there?

                • RobC …
                  17 April 2011 at 9:03 am

                  To me they come across as immature amateurs.

                  PeteG should be a shoo-in for a place on the Labour list 😀

                • felix …
                  17 April 2011 at 9:06 am

                  Labour don’t and shouldn’t give a crap what you think about this, Pete.
                   
                  Ordinary kiwis don’t want their assets sold out from under them. Simple.
                   
                  It’s up to you guys to try to change their minds and sell them something they really really don’t want, but Labour is with the zeitgeist on this issue no matter how you try to spin it.
                   
                  No asset sales.

            • The Voice of Reason 5.1.1.1.1.3
              17 April 2011 at 8:29 am

              Stop Asset Sales!

              Nothing vague about that, Pete. You really should give coffee a try, it might sharpen up your contributions. Or not, as the case may be.

              Obviously you don’t know Palmy. College and Fitz is one of the busiest intersections in the city (hence the location, location, location of Hapeta’s motel). As the name College suggests, its also the main route to a high school and a large primary school as well. A fair percentage of the drivers would be young parents who will be directly ripped off by asset sales, so it was a perfectly targeted event.

              Lees Galloway is a popular local MP who won his seat at the last election against the odds. Funnily enough, one of his successful tactics was daily street corner events like this, including regular ones at the same spot the soon to be second placed candidate is moaning about now. So I would say that is empirical evidence that placard waving works, Pete.

      • Draco T Bastard 5.1.2
        16 April 2011 at 8:05 pm

        I think asset sales and stopping them will actually resonate with people and keeping it in the public eye will pay off well by the time the election comes along. If I had some Greens signs for them I’d have them up on my fence.

      • Peter 5.1.3
        17 April 2011 at 4:05 pm

        Rex, fair enough! It would seem that Labour, NZ First and the Greens all oppose asset sales. Assuming that the Left combined most likely have far less resources than National, how would you plan to beat them?

        • Rex Widerstrom 5.1.3.1
          17 April 2011 at 4:28 pm

          I agree with felix et al, Peter… it’s not actually a hard sell. I’d say it’s won already, but Labour certainly need to keep reminding people they’re against it.

          And then, of course, resist the temptation to roll over and have their tummy scratched if National offer a “compromise”… or lamely say “it could have been worse, we stopped those horrible Solyent Green plans, so only your assets are up for sale, not your actual selves“.

          In terms of strategy, I can only repeat what I said above – retail on the ground to reinforce the media stuff going on nationally. And like retail, establishing a personal relationship with each and every customer beats a big sign on the outside of the store.

          Not that sign waving is a big issue. Can’t do any harm, I just agree with PeteG that most people don’t take notice – as in, they see but they don’t really absorb. But if Lees-Galloway thinks it works, I can’t see what all the fuss is about… and I do remember Palmy and that’s an obvious place to do it, if you’re going to…

          [Oh, and stay away from NZF of course. Jeffrey Dahmer probably had some principled ideas too, but the whole eating people thing would have tended to detract from the message of probity and vision you’re trying to deliver].

  6. The Voice of Reason 6
    16 April 2011 at 8:53 pm

    There’s a couple of things that stand out for me about this matter. One, that the Nat candidate is pissed off that nobody in Head Office told her the campaign had started, and secondly, that Iain Lees Galloway is the only provincial Labour MP to win a seat, and at his first crack and against the tide too, because he’s got a good, active team around him.
     
    I’m picking a solid increase in his majority when he is returned to parliament in November and a footnote in the history books for the hapless Hapeta.
     

  7. outofbed 7
    16 April 2011 at 11:50 pm

    Well If Labour are really serious about asset sales, they would  do there best to ensure victory in the Election November 2011 , However even though it is obvious that Goff will not beat Key they persist with him, therefore ensuring asset sales.
    BTW the Green Party having been running a keep it kiwi campaign for six months now