Why National won’t win

138 comments on “Why National won’t win ”

• Comments are now closed

1. monkey boy 1

   25 September 2008 at 6:59 am

   despite the lead in the polls for over a year, despite the fact that nothing hurled at ‘Teflon-John’ seems to dent his popularity, despite the fact that labour have isolated themselves from each meaningful coalition partner or potential one – apart from Winston Peters. They are still going to win the General Election. Even despite the fact that national is clocking an average 50% to Labour’s 36% (ish), and that Helen Clark has decided to run a strategy of ‘Trust’ which is akin to Casanova running on a ‘celebacy’ platform?
   Come on matey-boy is the political landscape so barren of credible leadership that you feel the need to go and live in Narnia?
   (A Land ruled by a white witch in which it is always winter, and wherein enemies are turned to stone) Hmmm come to think of it…. perhaps she too is being coached by dwarves.
2. monkey boy 2

   25 September 2008 at 7:02 am

   ‘coached by dwarves’ nice allusion eh? It’s not big and it’s not clever!
   captcha = ‘complex Tallman’ I suppose next to a dwarf with learning difficulties I would almost qualify for that.
3. monkey boy 3

   25 September 2008 at 7:06 am

   SP – No offence or direct ref to you intended by the way… no honestly! It just came out that way.

   sorry
4. Robinsod 4

   25 September 2008 at 7:09 am

   Three comments in a row MB? You’re looking kinda defensive lad.
5. monkey boy 5

   25 September 2008 at 7:14 am

   no, just don’t want to make out that I think Steve is a Dwarf with learning difficulties. Ober Leutenant. What are you doing up at this time of the morning Did you shit the bed?
6. Robinsod 6

   25 September 2008 at 7:23 am

   Oh MB – early bird and all that. I wasn’t expecting a worm like you though…
7. Go The Right 7

   25 September 2008 at 7:25 am

   Steve I don’t know if you have noticed lately but many more Kiwis don’t like Labour sorry mistake. Its not Labour they don’t like it the Femdom government that has been constructed by Helen Clark.

   We are now starting to see many letters surface from the most strident former Labour voters saying they will never vote Labour again while Helen Clark is in.

   Our Prime Minister said she is fighting this Election is on trust and then they try to Muscle the Maori Party to vote for Winston and join them in their corruption.

   Its great now that the Maori Party don’t trust Labour as they have witnessed how Labour truly operates.

   Whatever is said on this blog while it may give you some comfort doesn’t matter. The tide of Public opinion will vote Labour out.It will be mainly for their Social Engineering Policies and their arrogance in this last term. Sadly it seems that this happens to most Governments that have been in for 3 terms
8. lprent 8

   25 September 2008 at 7:26 am

   Yeah it is noticeable that people tend to start at work…
   You get caught in the reboot 10 minutes ago? I try to do one at least once a month when I can watch it.
9. lprent 9

   25 September 2008 at 7:33 am

   Anyway back on topic. It is noticeable that National are having real problems with their fig-leafs. A little pressure and they start looking like bits of A5 tacked together rather than A1.

   Somehow I don’t think that Key is a particularly good king and isn’t going to be able to carry off the no clothes thing. Essentially he lacks political experience. I get the impression that he seems to think that it is done by connecting the dots to get from point A to point B. Politics doesn’t work that way so he keeps getting blind-sided.

   Problem is that these things would disappear and be forgotten in the trading world. In politics they’ll still be dredged up and examined for potential character and policy flaws decades later. All part of the voters decision making process.
10. Felix 10

    25 September 2008 at 7:36 am

    Have a nap, Rob.

    You type like an imbecile when you’ve been up all night.
11. Felix 11

    25 September 2008 at 7:39 am

    lprent,

    As someone pointed out the other day he’s had no political experience except as the golden boy. He’s never been unpopular, never had the media turn on him, never had things not go according to plan.

    Until now.
12. Razorlight 12

    25 September 2008 at 7:39 am

    Kiwis don’t like National – the people and the policies.

    This would have to be one of the stranger statements you have made SP. Why on earth would you make such a sweeping and inaccurate generalisation.

    I am a Kiwi as are the other 40-50% of the electorate who consistently say they will be voting for this party you hate. The party you hate with an unhealthy passion.

    I apologise for diagnosing your health but it is astounding how you can claim what ‘Kiwi’s’ don’t like when the evidence is quite the opposite.
13. jtuckey 13

    25 September 2008 at 7:44 am

    So based on this commentary from SP NZer’s don’t like any of the political parties or the people within them ?

    Hah, probably close to the truth but not the point you were trying to make.
14. lprent 14

    25 September 2008 at 7:53 am

    j: That is exactly the point. Most kiwi’s don’t think much of politicians. In the absence of a credible policies from National they look at personalities and if they feel they can trust candidates.

    Just watching the Henry interview. It is funny watching Henry giving Key a lesson in politics. He should charge for it.
15. lprent 15

    25 September 2008 at 7:59 am

    Felix: It is going to be interesting to see how he handles as the pressure comes on more. It only goes up from here.
16. monkey-boy 16

    25 September 2008 at 8:02 am

    I like comments that start with a premise, that won’t stand up to serious scrutiny, and then finish with a put-down at the end.

    It’s really cute.
17. monkey-boy 17

    25 September 2008 at 8:09 am

    Seriously though, when Helen is kicked out on her tushy this year, what will be your fondest moments to reminisce about? I liked the ‘Is that it? Is that it!!?? – Woooorra lightweight!!” comment after Keys Budget rebuttal, and how she goes ‘EeYerrrrs.” when they ask her a first question at Question Time like (Member of Opposion:) ‘Does the Prime Minister stand by her previous remarks that Winston Peters (Benson Pope, Taito Phillip Fields, Lianne Dalzeil, etc) is ‘a hardworking and conscietious Minister?”
    (Clark) “EeYerrrss.” then sits down again.
    It’s beautiful.

    And that’s why she will lose the election.
    In a way, I’ll miss the old battleaxe.
18. Go The Right 18

    25 September 2008 at 8:19 am

    Hi can someone please tell me what Helen’s idea of due process is?

    Is she really meaning I am just waiting while my lackey’s are working behind the scene with other parties to pervert the course of Justice. In what is meant to be our highest court in the Land.

    Is this an Election based on trust ? Does Helen have a different idea of trust to the average New Zealander?

    [lprent: GTR – Why not describe your view about due process in the privileges committee. Then we can show you where you are wrong. That seems like a good way of dispelling the common view here that you simply parrot. ]
19. r0b 19

    25 September 2008 at 8:29 am

    Seriously though, when Helen is kicked out

    Seriously though, if Labour (its about parties and policies, not individuals) lose the election, there are a few things I will certainly miss.

    Things like unemployment down to 30 year lows, crime down, numbers on benefits down, economy growing, Working for Families, superannuation increases, minimum wage raised every year, four weeks leave, 20 hours free early childhood education, fair rents, interest free loans for students, poverty / childhood poverty rates down, suicide rates down, cheaper doctors vists, modern apprenticeships, and employment law which stopped the widening wage gap with Australia. An independent and sane foreign policy. Planning for the long term future via Cullen Fund and KiwiSaver. Strengthening the economy by paying off massive amounts of 70’s and 80’s debt (so reducing previously crippling annual interest charges), a booming rural economy, and with state owned assets (Air NZ, KiwiBank, KiwiRail, breaking up the Telecom monopoly, back to ACC). A strong economy well placed to survive the current international financial crisis.

    Yep, just a few little things I’ll miss.
20. Scribe 20

    25 September 2008 at 8:32 am

    Steve,

    Are these your own reasons why National won’t win? The indented quotes are usually used to cite someone else, that’s why I’m asking.
21. monkey-boy 21

    25 September 2008 at 8:38 am

    Yep, just a few little things I’ll miss.

    But what about the voting public? The rarified atmosphere of the politico is of no interst to them.
    You see that is why the VDS was devised, because Labour knows that the floating voter and voter apathy will destroy them. So their strategy is to try and galvanise and minimise this kind of thing by attempting to write Key as a bogey-man figure. But it isn’t about Key. It’s really about lack of vision, lack of policy, arrogance, staleness and corruption all firmly the fault of Helen Clark, Michael CUllen, Mike Smith, and Heather Simpson.
    That is what will lose the election for Labour.

    captcha: Helen chilled
22. Inventory2 22

    25 September 2008 at 8:44 am

    You guys keep banging on about the “failed policies of the 1990’s”. But in doing so, you conveniently ignore the fact that Helen Clark, Michael Cullen, Phil Goff, Annette King and Trevor Mallard all did time with the 1984-90 Lange/Palmer/Moore administration, with all bar Mallard serving as Ministers, and Mallard as a Whip. You ignore the fact that Helen Clark and Michael Cullen supported the policies of Roger Douglas, regardless of any misgivings they may have privately held. And Clark and Cullen both voted FOR the sale of Telecom.

    Sorry, but you can’t just put up one side of the argument.
23. monkey-boy 23

    25 September 2008 at 8:53 am

    ps r0b that line ‘it’s about parties and policies, not individuals’ was a classic for here. I thought it was about ‘Trust’.
24. Clint Heine 24

    25 September 2008 at 8:54 am

    I am not too sure Kiwis will turn their distrust of National into votes for Labour. There are emails and letters coming our way every day from Labour supporters who are hurting so much about this current situation with Winston.

    I have to ask, and expect an honest answer – what does Winston have on Labour? It has to be huge. Why else would Helen behave nicer to Winston than she did with Benson Pope and Taito Field? It doesn’t add up guys.
25. Stephen 25

    25 September 2008 at 8:58 am

    Inventory2, wow! I’m surprised it’s so many. Certainly an interesting point – perhaps you should submit a poster to ‘Both Eyes Open’?
26. Dom 26

    25 September 2008 at 9:04 am

    Razorlight – actually it’s only a percentage of those they are polling that say they will vote for National. And the polling is inherently flawed (others on this blog have done great posts that point this out).
27. Jeeves 27

    25 September 2008 at 9:11 am

    I happen to agree with you, Steve, in respect of your criticisms of National. However the reason National will win is that people correctly perceive Labour as tired, corrupt and visionless.
28. forgetaboutthelastone 28

    25 September 2008 at 9:11 am

    Inventory2:

    The difference being that Labour in the last 9 years of government have done things differently compared to the Labour government of the 80s. National, by aLL accounts, plan to do the same things that were done in the 90’s.

    Sorry, but you can’t apply every criticism of National to Labour as well.

    captcha: assigned cannot
29. Tim Ellis 29

    25 September 2008 at 9:13 am

    r0b, when you say that if Labour loses the election, you will miss those things, are you saying that these things would have remained if Labour had been the government?

    I know you like to be very precise with your words, so I don’t want to take what you’re saying out of context.

    robinsod, brilliant line about the early bird, by the way. See what happens when you don’t resort to vulgarity.
30. Felix 30

    25 September 2008 at 9:21 am

    “supported the policies of Roger Douglas, regardless of any misgivings they may have privately held”

    Sounds like you’re comparing Labour in the 80s with National today, and fair enough too.

    I don’t ever want to see those kind of policies or that kind of government again.
31. jo zinny 31

    25 September 2008 at 9:23 am

    iprent: you wrote — “I get the impression that he seems to think that it is done by connecting the dots to get from point A to point B.”

    If you’ll accept a single word for this it is aperceptive. This literally means without perception. In reality also it comes from picking other peoples’ minds. A clue to this is his case is in the NZH bio piece of July(i think it was), where the reporters refered to his management style of calling his ‘broking’ team into his office and asking what they think about something before he.. blah blah.

    Not necessarily a bad strait for top corporate managers and/or politicians, though exceedingly doubtful on ‘fresh’ or future ground where everybody’s experience is lacking.
32. Felix 32

    25 September 2008 at 9:25 am

    Tim I just read your whole comment.

    See what happens when you only take 3 short paragraphs to say nothing instead of 6 long ones to say nothing?

    Nothing.
33. jo zinny 33

    25 September 2008 at 9:27 am

    inventory 2: you wrote: “supported the policies of Roger Douglas”.

    In ignorance. Admitted I reckon — though not forthrightly stated – in what followed that assertion. And acceptable only if we conclude that the said Mr. Douglas(at the time) was quite ignorant as well.
34. monkey-boy 34

    25 September 2008 at 9:28 am

    ‘robinsod, brilliant line about the early bird, by the way. See what happens when you don’t resort to vulgarity.’

    yes, but he still betrayed a reference to his own insecurities about the size of his willy..
35. travellerev 35

    25 September 2008 at 9:37 am

    Jeeves,

    In the least corrupt country I’ll take tired, corrupt and visionless any day above let’s loot New Zealand and bugger off to Hawaii to celebrate the greedy land grab with my Money Masters.
36. Glenn 36

    25 September 2008 at 9:44 am

    One day, Steve, I’d like to have a drink with you and get your candid, expert opinion on when you realised Labour was toast.
37. Tim Ellis 37

    25 September 2008 at 9:48 am

    On your substantive points SP, the public appear to disagree with you on every point. Which makes your claim that these problems are “fatal” more than just reaching.
38. Crank 38

    25 September 2008 at 9:53 am

    Let travellerev be a warning to any youngsters here who are thinking of dabbling with psycotropics.
39. Evidence-Based Practice 39

    25 September 2008 at 9:58 am

    Didn’t Helen C say about JK last year that she had faced five National Party leaders in her time as leader of the Labour Party and JK was the most insubstantial of them all? She’s an astute woman.
40. travellerev 40

    25 September 2008 at 10:22 am

    Crank,

    Accusing someone of illegal drug use is not nice especially if you have never met this person. In fact it’s slander.
    911 was an inside job whether you like it or not. Good science will not be denied.

    Actually you and Billy and Lucas and those who are unable to see how wicked governments can be are the lucky ones. Ignorance truly is bliss.

    And to get back to the thread; it is awesome to see the Kiwi’s waking up to National and the international banksters and their fraudulent and nasty practices.

    Go Kiwi’s go.
41. gobsmacked 41

    25 September 2008 at 10:23 am

    The post heading should be: “Why National will be very unpopular very soon after coming to power”. The analysis is accurate, but not the title.

    To stop National winning, swing voters have to be persuaded to vote for somebody else. That’s Labour’s job. They’d better get a move on.

    As of now, National are getting the “What the hell” vote. That’s the people who walk into the polling booth and say to themselves: “I’m not happy with the government, I’m sick of Winston, I don’t trust National, but … what the hell …” – and then they tick National.

    They are making the wrong choice. They will soon regret it. But that won’t stop them doing it. Only a good, positive campaign for Labour will do that.

    When is it going to start?
42. Tim Ellis 42

    25 September 2008 at 10:39 am

    it is awesome to see the Kiwi’s waking up to National and the international banksters and their fraudulent and nasty practices.

    Travellerev, I don’t like to be the spoiler in your argument, but let’s assume for a moment, that National is evil and have some strong connection to an international conspiracy.

    Where is your evidence that Kiwis are “waking up” to it? The polls put National a long, long distance in front of Labour. That distance has barely fluctuated over the last year and a half.

    With the exception of gobsmacked, who does show some reality with Labour’s fate, most of the left wing commenters on this thread seem to live in fantasy-land.
43. TomS 43

    25 September 2008 at 10:50 am

    Actually, the circuit breaker IMHO will be the tax cut pledge. Politically, National have made the mistake of over hyping and over promising on tax cuts. National have created the expectation of a fifty dollar plus tax cut to a meaningful percentage of the population, certainly down into the lower middle class. They just won’t get away with delivering their headline fifty dollars a week to only the 15% of New Zealander who earn over $60,000 that National seem to think are the “mainstream.”

    The trouble is that the cost of borrowing is spiralling internationally, so they can no longer borrow the sort of dosh they’ll need to deliver a fifty a week tax cut to $45-60,000 income bracket that has an expectation of a big tax cut. But they also say they won’t cut core government spending. So they are in a bit of a bind I reckon. But if they don’t deliver fifty a week to struggle street, the voter backlash will be gigantic.

    So, to digress, where will the money come from?

    First of all, “no cuts in government spending” doesn’t meant “guaranteeing government spending will keep pace with inflation” – so you can keep spending at 2008 dollar terms while you let inflation effectively reduce core spedning by around 12% over three years – and re-distribute the increased tax take as a tax cut. Working out how the teachers, nurses, doctors etc etc will view and react to that doesn’t require a crystal ball – be ready for MAJOR public sector disruption if National is allowed back into government.

    Secondly, they will almost certainly look to a “manufactured crisis” as an excuse to break their election promises. What form breaking those promises takes will depend on the unresolved internal power struggle within the National Party. If the currently powerful dry faction have their way, they will want to use the manufactured crisis as an excuse to return to the 1990’s neo-liberal revolution. If the wets can prevail, they’ll probably just postpone their tax cut bribe that got them elected, make enough tax changes at the top end to keep their big business kleptocrats happy, and carry out a limited privatisation agenda driven largely by a big business wish list.

    Plain common sense should tell us that if National win they’ll find themselves in the position of having to renege on election promises or clear undertakings to the electorate.
44. rave 44

    25 September 2008 at 10:52 am

    Steve’s main point is correct.
    Most Kiwis don’t want National’s not-so-secret agenda.
    Most kiwis don’t want to go back to Rogernomics.

    Conservative Garth George in NZH this morning tells off expat billionaire Stephen Jennings for preaching new right gospel, tells him to bunk off back to Russia and take Kerr and Co with him.
    Most kiwis don’t like rich pricks stealing our silver and then moaning about their bonuses. [the “Oh I can’t be a crook because I took a loss” toss].

    US Senator figures US bailout running total at $1.7 trillion – its already half the cost of the Iraq war that Key would have got us into.

    Wednesday September 24, 2008 — U.S. Senator Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.)
    “While the current discussion about the financial crisis is focused on the proposal to provide a $700 billion Wall Street bailout, this figure does not take into account many other bailouts meant to address the current economic situation, including:

    – $29 billion: JP Morgan Chase for Bear Stearns – $300 billion: Fed Loans to Wall Street Firms – $300 billion: Federal Housing Administration – $200 billion: Fannie and Freddie – $87 billion: JP Morgan Chase for Lehman Financing – $85 billion: AIG – $50 billion: Prop up Money Market Funds”
45. lukas 45

    25 September 2008 at 11:02 am

    SP, do you have any evidence to back up your claims that “A large majority of New Zealanders don’t like the policies National wants to implement”.

    I find this statement quite odd for two reasons. 1- you don’t believe that National has released any policy (cake and eat it too?) and 2- I wouldn’t consider a touch over 50% a vast majority by any stretch of the imagination… if you do, do you consider that a vast majority of the population (going by their elected representatives in parliament) believe Winston Peters lied?

    Eve- inside your head must be a really exciting place, but seriously, how much pot did your Mum smoke when she was pregnant with you?
46. Felix 46

    25 September 2008 at 11:25 am

    Oh look it’s “make fun of Ev” day again.

    Grow up kids.
47. Tim Ellis 47

    25 September 2008 at 11:26 am

    rave, I don’t think that was SP’s main point at all. I think his main point was that National would not win the election, based on some judgements about what “most people” and the “majority” believe, which don’t appear to be backed up by any evidence on his part. In fact, the overwhelming evidence would say that the majority of people, as surveyed in opinion polls, do believe that John Key is the best person to lead the country, and do believe the National Party is the best party to deliver it.
48. Aj 48

    25 September 2008 at 11:50 am

    It’s going to be fun seeing how the Nats manage to give a tax cut of $50 a week to a lower single income working family who currently pay no tax at all
49. Go The Right 49

    25 September 2008 at 1:01 pm

    I think National will I dont see Labour getting above 33% the reasons why are listed below.
    Labour rightly or wrongly wants to bulldoze people and parties to accept theirs is the only way.

    What is of great concern is the impact of this new ETS law. New Zealand Steel has now said it will not do the $1 billion dollar upgrade to the mill.

    That one factory has 600 people working there and pumps $4 million a week into the local community.

    It also affects the lively-hood of some 6000 people.

    We hear also that many Timber mills are now shutting on the Westcoast despite being promised by Labour there would be logs to cut and it would be sustainable.

    One mill owner made contact with the Government after his mill burnt down to see whether it was worth him reinvesting he was assured that it was.

    He has spent $3 million dollars of his own money and now faces financial ruin due to the shortage of timber, and will likely lose his home.

    Recently a storm went thru the Westcoast and many stands of native timber were blown over.

    The Loggers asked if they could cut up the fallen timber they were told no leave it to rot.

    This just exemplifies Labour inability to come to grips with the reality of doing business or helping business even in their own heartland.

    We all remember the man from Timberland’s called Kit who stood up to Labour over the logging on the Westcoast.

    Labour had him removed from his Job and Damien O’connor lost his role at the end of the day he has been proven right.

    This is a sad indictment on Government that could not recognise a Business opportunity if it was staring it right in its face. They have to go before they close the whole country down.

    Sadly National will pick up a cot case to deal with.
50. rave 50

    25 September 2008 at 2:50 pm

    Tim you are being pedantic again.

    Go back and read what Steve said. If and when kiwis realise what National’s real agenda is, on the basis of reactions to revelations so far, one can postulate that National is a goner.

    I would put a positive spin on this.

    As kiwis come to see the hollow man under the glossy JK packaging, they will be horrified at the vision of NZ joining the global casino where there is only quick profits and no sustainability. They will then realise that the short term adjustments needed for NZ to become sustainable are challenges for ordinary people to take up such as nationalising the key industries and planning production for people and not not profits.
51. Crank 51

    25 September 2008 at 2:59 pm

    Why National wont win? Not too sure about that.

    Word on the street is that [deleted]

    Why have we not heard about this? Well the story goes that due to police force being in the Prime Ministers pocket she told her lackey Broad to make it all go away.

    Have heard this from various unrelated sources now. Who knows?

    [lprent: Because pathetic wankers like you enjoy jerking off on it. It is the classic rumor I know someone and also someone else… No direct witnesses, no documentation. Have a 4 week ban for peddling crap on our site – then I’ll make a decision if I want you around at all.]
52. randal 52

    25 September 2008 at 3:50 pm

    word on the street is that the National party has used up its quota of dirty sleazy little stories about other peoples sexuality and they must come up with some policy. As their dear leader has been outed for being a master of the universe..i.e. a big swinging dick at a wall street money removal firm then there is faint chance of that. and if the Nats continuing using filth as their only weapon then they are going to be flushed donwn the same dunny they managed somehow to crawl out of.
53. Tim Ellis 53

    25 September 2008 at 3:57 pm

    Steady on, Crank. You just can’t say those sorts of things on somebody else’s blog.
54. Phil 54

    25 September 2008 at 4:43 pm

    If and when kiwis realise what National’s real agenda is, on the basis of reactions to revelations so far, one can postulate that National is a goner.

    Various left-of-centre commentators (including some/many on this blog) have gotten hot and steamy over lots of ‘revelations’ from National already.

    Look at the damp squib that turned out to be the fury over “frankly, it’s a market”. Or the not-so-secret taper-gate. Or the ramshakle PR fiasco with leaked policy… and still the Nat’s are polling near enough to 50%.

    By and large, any impact these events have had has been minimal and short term. I’m willing to bet that the Tranzrail share issue will be the same.
55. travellerev 55

    25 September 2008 at 5:02 pm

    Tim,

    National is not evil or part of an international conspiracy nor have I ever said that. I think most Kiwi’s who vote for National are normal hard working salt of the earth people.

    If you have been following the Wall street fraudsters and the way the dollar is coming undone through their fraudulent machinations you have to have a second look at John Key. I truly advise you to have a look at the Money Masters it is an excellent documentary about the history of the modern Central banking system. He was part of that system and it is up to no good.

    Judging by the fact that he never talks about Wall street and what he did with Bonds and Derivatives while he headed the Debt department and managed 140 people dreaming up the crap that is now destroying our financial system I take it that this is something he does not want people to know about and with good reason. His speculation and that of his mates is wiping out NZ financial investment institutions who all bought their mortgage crap and I bet you most of those people who have lost their money are National voters.

    Is he evil? I don’t know him so I can’t tell but I do know that I wouldn’t vote for someone who is prepared to lie and scheme to get into power without engaging with us the voters about what National would do when in power and neither would I vote for a greedy ex-Wall street banker who can’t stop speculating and lies about it when he has a conflict of interest.

    I just had a discussion with a dairy farming mate of mine. Who said John Key will sort this country out and when I asked if he would truly vote for a proven liar he said,”people can change and I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt.” Mindbogling.

    Crank,

    You are a nasty piece of work aren’t you, spreading rumours and allegations about people unable to defend themselves. The internet is a great place for angry anonymous males who think it’s funny to spread gossip and malicious lies about others.
    Why don’t you start your own blog and keep your filth there.
56. John McKenzie 56

    25 September 2008 at 5:46 pm

    A little aside I know but I was surprised today to notice some of the Campaign Hub posters appearing around Victoria University.

    From my experience there seems to be a real polarization amongst university goers, with some heavily involved (like those who put up the posters and recently had a showing of The Hollow Men) and others seemingly unaware that there’s an election on the horizon.

    What we can only hope for is with the critical thinking skills they are developing university goers will make a choice that isn’t used-car-salesman-Key.
57. Tim Millar 57

    25 September 2008 at 6:20 pm

    I can only say this, I used to be a labour supporter, but there is no way I can possibly countenance voting for them this time around. It’s not that I’m suddenly right wing, in fact I believe in helping those who need it for genuine reasons, and spending our taxpayer money on health and education as the means to ensure our future. I believe that everyone should have a fair chance. I don’t believe that someone given a fair chance / leg up should continue to be supported by the rest of us though. I wish there was some middle road between someone being supported for life and someone being required to make it on their own. I wish there were 3 main political parties; left, right and centre – instead of the left and right main parties and the number of smaller parties, some of which approach centre (others of which are at the fringes) . At the moment Labour seem to be heading down the communist/socialist path in the manner of suppressing freedom of speech and dictating to the public, and that just isn’t what I want, hence why I won’t be supporting them this time around. The Standard seems to be a communist manifesto at a quick glance, not appealing at all (yes i will understand if you decide not to publish this).
    Why, Labour, why have you let me down?
58. IrishBill 58

    25 September 2008 at 6:23 pm

    I’ve noticed this “I used to be a labour voter” meme doing the rounds in the last few days. It seems to be a line lifted from Kiwiblog.
59. Phil 59

    25 September 2008 at 6:45 pm

    “Ex Labour Voter” has been around Kiwiblog for a long time and, afaik, is one dude.

    I think they’ve dreamed it up themselves and finally hit critical mass.

    John,
    Good example of critical thinking;
    Key = used car saleman, therefore I won’t vote for him.

    It’s about as intelligent as those oldies who vote for Winston or Jim because ‘they look handsome’.
60. travellerev 60

    25 September 2008 at 6:45 pm

    Tim Millar,

    I know she looks dippy but their politics are what we need right now.
    No more funding of privately owned (And yes, Don Brash whose good friend Milton Friedman (google this name) is one of the architects of the coming disasters made sure ours was sold of too in 1989) Federal Reserve. A bloody labour prime minister signed the federal reserve act.
61. travellerev 61

    25 September 2008 at 6:50 pm

    Phil,

    Sometimes you come across as really thick, the previous is one of them.
    If someone acts and talks like a used car salesman you vote for him yeah good idea. Duh.
62. gobsmacked 62

    25 September 2008 at 6:56 pm

    Tim Millar

    Did you vote Labour at the last election? If so, which policies were you voting for, and on which of those policies have Labour “let you down”?
63. Lew 63

    25 September 2008 at 6:57 pm

    Tim Millar: I guess you’ll be voting Green then? Or Progressive? United Future? ACT perhaps? The māori party?

    “I wish there were 3 main political parties; left, right and centre – instead of the left and right main parties and the number of smaller parties, some of which approach centre (others of which are at the fringes).”

    What you’ve said here is “I wish this system which is intrinsically complicated, where the definitions change as a result of ordinary occurrences, upon which the most reasonable people frequently disagree, would be made simple and easy for me so I don’t have to think about it before voting.”

    Speaking as a non-partisan (partisans will tell you different, because they want your vote), if you don’t understand what the candidates and parties on offer to you represent, and won’t learn, the mature course of action is to not vote at all. Of course, a far superior course of action is to learn about them, so that you can vote, and I mean no endorsement, with both eyes open.

    “At the moment Labour seem to be heading down the communist/socialist path in the manner of suppressing freedom of speech and dictating to the public”

    This illustrates my point. None of the incumbent parties in NZ represent anything even remotely resembling socialism, communism, tyranny or dictatorship, no matter what the extremists on either side might have you believe. Voter, educate thyself!

    L
64. Brett Dale 64

    25 September 2008 at 7:05 pm

    You really think National wont win the election?

    There are many reasons Labour won’t win.

    They have moved to far to the left, Hobbs cannot wash her hands of this.

    The economy is shot.

    People just don’t like a government who think they know what is best for them.

    The attitude that Cullen and Clark has, reminds me of the attitude that Garry Moore had during his terms, almost school teacher like, and a sheer disgust if he got questioned.
65. Tim Millar 65

    25 September 2008 at 7:20 pm

    I’m still researching who to vote for and I’m looking at policies (and yes I did vote Labour last election), so far I only have two certainties, not Labour, not NZ First. Actually that’s not quite right, I’ve also ruled out Jim Anderton. To be honest though, there is ugly floating all around the blogs and while nothing is attractive there is one other certainty, and that is I do not want to be in any team that has Chris Trotter supporting it.
66. gobsmacked 66

    25 September 2008 at 7:24 pm

    But Tim, what were you voting for last time? Geniune question (you haven’t answered).
67. Tim Millar 67

    25 September 2008 at 7:33 pm

    Lew, in reading what you’ve written I think you’re slightly off the mark. What I’m trying to say is i don’t want to be out there on the left where it’s leaning towards communism, and I don’t want to be out there on the right where we’re ultra-capitalist controlled by the rich few. I want a government that has a balance of policy which supports people’s right to earn more through hard work (the belief that one isn’t born into a social class and can better themselves) but at the same time we don’t turn our back on those who need our help. Labour hasn’t got this right and it’s looking to me like they’ve lost their way. NZ First is a joke, evidenced by Peters being a one-time national MP who now supports Labour in return for baubles in complete contradiction of his own speech (let’s be honest here, any respect for Winston went out the door as soon as he accepted the Foreign Affairs portfolio after his baubles of office speech – he’s been a joke to me from that point on). Labour have pushed through the EFA which even the law society has said ‘should be revoked’. We’re on our way to pogroms from what I can see. If National was even just average at the moment they’d have my vote, but I don’t see even that from them. Hence I’m still trying to figure out how my vote can best benefit NZ.
68. Lew 68

    25 September 2008 at 7:47 pm

    Tim Millar: It really sounds like you’re a United Future supporter who doesn’t realise it, yet. I was an an interview shooting today where Peter Dunne talked about how his role is to keep the major parties honest, and it sounds like that’s what you want. The trouble is that a vote for UF is essentially wasted unless you can get another couple thousand people around the motu to vote with you.

    Your comment is still somewhat misguided, though. NZ politics is really very moderate – our centre is more philosophically left than the US, Canada or Australia, but more right than most of Western Europe (including the UK). We have two major parties who broadly agree that markets work better than anything else, and that people need the proverbial hand up, rather than out. In spite of what you say, we have a very free media establishment, the least corrupt and wasteful public service in the world, and a strong history of cross-party consensus on a lot of major issues.

    The specific issues of which you speak (EFA, Peters) are fair cop as to why you might not vote Labour. In cases like this National seems like the sensible choice, and in reality there isn’t a huge amount between the two parties, as anyone who’s genuinely a socialist or a free radical will tell you. However, in 2008 there’s one very good reason for undecided moderates to vote for anyone other than National – because it looks like they’re in danger of winning a clear majority, and that’s legislative carte blanche for three years.

    If you want (a return to) moderacy, my recommendation is to pick a minor party (any of those I mentioned other than ACT) and give them your party vote. That way you’re voting for a brake on whichever major party seeks to form a coalition.

    L
69. Tane 69

    25 September 2008 at 7:50 pm

    We’re on our way to pogroms from what I can see.

    Like the man said, educate yourself Tim. You’re not doing yourself any credit wh comments like that.
70. Tim Millar 70

    25 September 2008 at 7:57 pm

    Gobsmacked, yes I voted Labour last election, on the general principal (which in hindsight now might have been a misguided opinion) that Labour’s policies were in the interests of everyone living together in a harmonious society. No one should die for lack of food and shelter basically – that’s my bottom line. Give people free education to what used to be (when I was at school) School Certificate. Give them free health care to keep them to a reasonable level of health. Give them opportunity to advance themselves.
    In 9 years I’m still waiting to see Labour get the health policy right. I accept that National didn’t get it right before Labour either, but 9 years, come on that’s long enough for a fair try at it. Same with education – the reports on progress are pretty dim. Now we’re close to an election the stuff Labour are trotting out is bordering on a farce. Take Phil Goff saying Labour is going to get tough on gangs. Who here can honestly say they believe that for longer than it takes to wonder why the Minister of Corrections is making the statement instead of the Minister of Justice or the Minister of Police?
71. Tim Millar 71

    25 September 2008 at 8:00 pm

    OH Tane, I’ve seen you around the blogs too, you’re the perfect example of one who would seem wiser if they would just shut up
72. Tane 72

    25 September 2008 at 8:03 pm

    Really bro? Cos I thought it was wiser not to say things like “We’re on our way to pogroms from what I can see” when talking about the political situation in New Zealand.
73. Tim Ellis 73

    25 September 2008 at 8:10 pm

    I’ve noticed this “I used to be a labour voter’ meme doing the rounds in the last few days. It seems to be a line lifted from Kiwiblog.

    I don’t doubt there’s an element of that IB, but we know from the polls that there are a large number of previously Labour voters who are now intending to vote National, so it’s just denial to put your hands in your ears and say that all of the people are saying that are just parroting a meme.

    I voted National last time, United in 2002 and Labour in 1999. I would say I’m quite firmly committed to voting National this time, but I don’t doubt that there is a group of Labour voters who are so disenchanted with Labour that they’re prepared to either not vote at all, or shock horror, hold their noses and vote National to get rid of them. I voted to get rid of Jenny Shipley in 1999 because I thought they were stale and had run out of ideas and direction. I voted Labour in 1987 and 1993 and National in 1990 and 1996.
74. gobsmacked 74

    25 September 2008 at 8:11 pm

    Pogroms? OK, now you’re just being silly.

    You said before:

    “Labour seem to be heading down the communist/socialist path in the manner of suppressing freedom of speech and dictating to the public …”

    Let’s check that one out. There are many global surveys of freedom, by reputable organisations. Here’s a good place to start:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_indices_of_freedom

    Have a read. Scroll down and find New Zealand. Take any respected international source, any NGO, and compare NZ with other Western democracies. We are near the top of every one.

    We are the least corrupt country in the world (Transparency International report, yesterday). And one of the most free.

    Read the reports. Get some perspective, please.
75. Tim Millar 75

    25 September 2008 at 8:21 pm

    I’m not your bro Tane, regardless of either of our heritage, that isn’t going to endear you to me. You could have chosen anything from my statements to comment about but you chose ‘pogroms’. So let’s look at that a bit closer then. Labour and their affiliates have introduced the Electoral Finance Act (which I noted the NZ Law Society has said is so flawed it should be repealed), they have attacked the integrity of the SFO without solid legal foundation, and they have politicised the Police (see comments by Greg O’Conner http://www.policeassn.org.nz).
    If National had done those things do you think I would believe for one second that you wouldn’t be jumping up and down about it?
76. Pascal's bookie 76

    25 September 2008 at 8:29 pm

    I used to support the Democrat party but 9/11 changed everything and now I’m pissed off about chappaquiddick.
77. Tim Millar 77

    25 September 2008 at 8:32 pm

    Lew, oddly enough I discussed this with my father who is in the Ohariu electorate and he said he supports Peter Dunne because of the good work he does in the electorate. It is something I considered but I’m in the Rongatai electorate (and having watched some Parliament TV Annette King is the last person I would vote for – which isn’t helping Labour in my opinion).
    Gobsmacked – sure pogroms are at the extreme but in the context of the last couple of weeks from Helen and Michael I think they’re inching closer to possibility.
78. Quoth the Raven 78

    25 September 2008 at 8:36 pm

    I like that wiki article gobsmacked for this:
    According to the rankings of the table above, the most free (the “all-blue”) countries are (in alphabetical order):

    Austria
    Canada
    Denmark
    Estonia
    Finland
    Germany
    Iceland
    Ireland
    Mauritius
    Netherlands
    New Zealand
    Sweden
    Switzerland
    United Kingdom

    Australia isn’t there and why? Because of their sub par freedom of press. But the righties still love to bitch and moan and wax lyrically, New Zealand sux, New Zealand sux, I’m moving to Aussie
79. gobsmacked 79

    25 September 2008 at 8:48 pm

    Just do some reading, Tim M – I’ve given you a place to start. I’m happy to engage in debate, but not with “black is white” assertions.

    Evidence versus Invention is a pretty pointless exchange.
80. Robinsod 80

    25 September 2008 at 8:51 pm

    Tim. Pogrom? Retarded. Do you even know what a pogrom is? Would you like to accurately define pogrom for us and then provide a clear and rational explanation of how we are approaching it? I’m betting $5 you end up sounding like a loon…
81. Tim Millar 81

    25 September 2008 at 8:52 pm

    Thanks Gobsmacked. I’ll do reading as you suggested and form my own decisions from what I find out
82. Lew 82

    25 September 2008 at 8:57 pm

    Tim: I, too, live in Rongotai. Voting for the electorate candidate who’ll best represent your geographical slice of godzone (irrespective of what party they’re from) is how MMP is supposed to work – so your old man’s choice of Dunne is wise. This is why Richard Prebble held the public-servant-and-university-student-dominated Wellington Central in MMP’s early days – because he was effective. It’s on that basis that I’ll vote for Annette King – not because she’s a Labour candidate, but because she’s in a position to make things happen. Judging by Question Time is somewhat pointless (though I admit I also do it). If I were still in Wellington Central I wouldn’t vote for Stephen Franks – not because he’s a Nat, because there are plenty of electorates where I would vote for a Nat – but because he’s a bigoted refugee from ACT.

    Talk of pogroms demonstrates a frightful lack of perspective. Really – compare NZ to some of the alternatives (historically and contemporaneously), and you’ll find that it’s not all that bad. This is why I suggest a bit of higher learning – I assume a reasonable level of education and will to apply oneself – read Hannah Arendt’s The Origins of Totalitarianism for a look at the conditions and forces necessary to stimulate the sorts of phenomena you imagine. It ain’t us.

    Also – interrogate your sources a bit more. You rightly bag Chris Trotter – but Greg O’Connor also represents a fairly hard-line position. Incidentally, much of his `politicisation of the police’ argument is derived from the line of reasoning established by Ian Wishart about Howard Broad which was thoroughly debunked by the IPCA earlier this year. To believe it, you need to accept that not only the Police Ministry, but the police operational hierarchy AND the judiciary are all corrupt – a position made somewhat incredible in light of the reports helpfully linked to above.

    L
83. Tim Millar 83

    25 September 2008 at 8:59 pm

    Robinsod, you could save us both a lot of time if you just give the $5 to the Salvation Army. I know you think you’re all that and more, but if I was inclined to investigate you I think I might find you guilty of illegally obtaining information from a computer account that you weren’t entitled to. Want to test it out?
84. Nedyah Hsan 84

    25 September 2008 at 9:10 pm

    And heres why Labour may not win:

    Being the incumbent, they have no desire to mobilise their people. Lving in the Mana electorate – sure, Winnies my MP, but when Hekia Parata has people doorknocking on the weekend making sure the populace knows that there’s another brown face on the menu – well, it’s given me pause to stop and think that maybe our side need to get off our collective butts and get on the street rather than use the interwebby thing as a method of outlining our grievances against Key, National etc.

    For some reason, Labour have a feeling they can just sleepwalk their way back in, without having woken up to the fact that due to being totally disconnected from the voters for the last 9 years, voters haven’t heard from anyone, been doorknocked by anyone, let alone had a “Hi, it’s your local incumbent MP here, how are you” phone call.

    Perhaps it’s just Mana – might be different for other electorates though I have a sneaky suspicion it won’t be.
85. Tim Millar 85

    25 September 2008 at 9:11 pm

    It’s clear that there is a mixture here of people with open and closed minds, and I guess I knew before I even posted here the first time that this is really the Labour club-house blog. I guess I was looking for reasons why I should keep voting Labour and I’m prepared to ignore the obvious blow hards who just want to have a go at someone (not unlike the last time I spoke to a union rep who proudly boasted he was the guy in school who always caused sh*t). I am in favour of policy that tries to be fair to everyone and that obviously doesn’t make me a Nat, so I’m looking for the best option. As I said earlier Labour have ruled themselves out by their own actions, and I’ve considered Winston a joke since he accepted the baubles after his non-bauble speech. Honestly, I think Helen has done good things but has now painted herself into a corner, and Cullen has just always rubbed me the wrong way with his smarmy antics. But there needs to be an alternative that will lead this country to a centrist government that will take care of all Kiwis while allowing someone to better themselves, don’t you think?
86. Lew 86

    25 September 2008 at 9:18 pm

    Hayden: When incumbent MPs go doorknocking, people ask `is this what I pay you a hundred grand a year to do?’ (and with some justification 🙂 )

    L
87. Lew 87

    25 September 2008 at 9:20 pm

    Tim: I get the feeling most of the people here (management and commentators) are more closely aligned with the Greens than with Labour. And there’s a strong, and fairly reasonable, population of moderate and not-so-moderate Nat and ACT supporters too.

    No Winston Peters supporters of whom I’m aware, though.

    L
88. Nedyah Hsan 88

    25 September 2008 at 9:21 pm

    Do you reckon they say that to Rodney too Lew?

    Re: NZ First Well… Im not a Winnie Peters fan, but certainly admire and respect Ron Marks.
89. Lew 89

    25 September 2008 at 9:24 pm

    H: In Epsom? Hell no, they ask him why he even gets out of bed for a hundred grand!

    L
90. Nedyah Hsan 90

    25 September 2008 at 9:28 pm

    Still, the fact remains Labour has a lot of disconnect from voters – those who don’t necessarily use online blogs, or read the political section of the papers, or even watch the news.

    If Helen had stepped down and let Goff take over the reins last year, or hell, even had an election last year (and then let Goff take over), Labour would be in a far better position than they are now.

    Still, it’s the way of NZ – boom times = high taxes to pay back borrowings. Recession = low taxes, high borrowings.. and the cycle continues. Wrong governments, wrong economic period.
91. Felix 91

    25 September 2008 at 9:31 pm

    “I used to support the Democrat party but 9/11 changed everything and now I’m pissed off about chappaquiddick.”

    I doubt whether the paid by the word Tim brothers will get that, but nice one Pb.
92. Tim Millar 92

    25 September 2008 at 9:38 pm

    Wow, the star of the 9 lives of Felix the cat knows how to type. So tell us more about Chappaquiddick Felix, is it to do with Ted Kennedy and the car accident?
    And why would you think that people who share the same first name would be brothers? Are you showing us just how witty you are? Is there some motive for this, are you trying to score political points in some manner by inferring a slight on us (even though it’s a stretch to say we even know each other, yet alone could be related given that we have different surnames)? And where do I go to collect my pay? Do you get yours from the taxpayer pool somehow, because if so I want to know if it’s being declared as an election expense.
    Really, aren’t you Chris Trotter or Robinsod posting under a nom-de-plume?

    [lprent: Crap. I pay for the site, every month. I treat accusations of that type as a direct attack on my integrity. It is the amongst the fastest known ways to get banned from the site. So if you want to get a fast ban – just keep saying that. You were just lucky I was sick yesterday.
    Read the About and the Policy. ]
93. Lew 93

    25 September 2008 at 9:51 pm

    Nedyah: After the TVNZ 7 internet debate the other night, I’m almost convinced David Cunliffe is going to be the next great Labour PM. From a political perspective, he completely owned it. (From a policy perspective, Hide and Williamson put in a comparable effort, but poor Metiria Turei was completely out of her depth).

    L
94. Pascal's bookie 94

    25 September 2008 at 9:57 pm

    Tim, I’m just saying this, and you can take it however you want.

    You sure are keen on dishing out the stuff you claim to hate. Why should you get treated with any respect? We don’t know you, you’ve only just got here and you’re just leaping to all sorts of conclusions about people and throwing around the pogrom rhetoric. When people throw some back at you, it’s their fault for reacting.
95. Lew 95

    25 September 2008 at 9:59 pm

    Maybe he thinks we’re like Kiwiblog’s commenters.

    L
96. r0b 96

    25 September 2008 at 10:00 pm

    In 9 years I’m still waiting to see Labour get the health policy right. … Same with education – the reports on progress are pretty dim.

    Be pissed at Labour if you like, but at least be pissed for real reasons.

    Health – this international survey (Australia Canada Germany UK USA and NZ) ranked our health system second over all for performance, which was achieved on by far the lowest per capita funding (see the table on that page). We have a world class health system that is outstandingly cost effective.

    Education – we are well above OECD averages on almost all measures. NZ children rank fifth in reading, ninth in mathematics, seventh in science.

    Our health and education systems are world class.
97. Tim Millar 97

    25 September 2008 at 10:01 pm

    Gobsmacked – yes I do appear to have used the term pogrom inaccurately, my intention was to say that I could see labour crafting laws to enable them to root out political dissenters rather than people of a certain religion. I confess to being wrong (and Robinsod, I pledge to give $5 to the next charity I see on the streets of Wellington, but that doesn’t change my opinion of you)
98. Tim Ellis 98

    25 September 2008 at 10:11 pm

    Tim, here’s some advice.

    People on this blog don’t take kindly to being asked to justify Labour Party policy. Part of the reason is that it’s their blog and they can write about anything they like.

    It’s not unreasonable to say that quite often the people who run the Standard have to put up with flames and trolls, and it must get quite tiresome. I believe that your motives are genuine and you were looking to engage in discussion. But given the amount of baiting and trolling that goes on here from people with too much time on their hands, it’s understandable that when somebody new comes in, asking for justification, that the new person might be treated with some hostility.

    I think it’s unfortunate that IrishBill, one of the main authors here, accused you of being dishonest about your voting intentions.

    If you want my opinion, there are a few people here with genuine centre-left views who are genuinely interested in engaging in debate. I’m a centre-right voter and I’m voting National this election. I enjoy debating with those people. I think this is one of the best fora online for real debate, and it’s great that you’ve got some views you want to express. Make sure you don’t abuse people personally, behave civilly, try not to use intemperate or hyperbolic language, treat others with respect, and generally you’ll get treated with respect in return.
99. randal 99

    25 September 2008 at 10:11 pm

    Irish bIll…that one has been lifted straight out of twidemeeopinions where it has been ‘big’ for about 18 months now. If one is au fait with the posters other diatribes then it is always the same rot.
100. Tim Millar 100

     25 September 2008 at 10:11 pm

     International surveys are all well and good for those who think they are the measure. Personally I’m thinking I should enroll my 4 year old son and newborn daughter in private schools even though it will be hard for me to afford, but why take chances with my children? Similarly my family has private medical insurance thanks to our employers, but once again why would I take chances with my family? The real problem is for those that can’t manage to go private, they could die on a waiting list or they could be zoned into a school that has poor performance and inadequate funding. Why are none of you asking why we’ve paid half a billion dollars above valuation for the railways when we could have put that money into education or health? I know I am.
101. randal 101

     25 September 2008 at 10:15 pm

     tim millar I dont care a tinkers toss what you think or who you voted for and four five buck notes buys a foil wrapped pipe dream so do yourself a favout and lighten up.
102. Pascal's bookie 102

     25 September 2008 at 10:17 pm

     Tim, glad to see you’ve backed off from the word pogrom. Stick around, you might be surprised.

     The thing about that word that gets people’s backs up is not the religious aspect though. It’s the murder and violence. A pogrom usually involves widespread state sanctioned rioting. Whatever you may think of the EFA, it is a long way away from a pogrom.
103. r0b 103

     25 September 2008 at 10:18 pm

     International surveys are all well and good for those who think they are the measure.

     Or in other words, the real data doesn’t support my prejudices so la la la la la I can’t hear you.

     Personally I’m thinking I should enroll my 4 year old son and newborn daughter in private schools even though it will be hard for me to afford, but why take chances with my children?

     Do whatever you like, knock yourself out. But don’t pretend that the public systems are anything less than very good (not perfect – never can be never will be – but very good).

     Why are none of you asking why we’ve paid half a billion dollars above valuation for the railways when we could have put that money into education or health? I know I am.

     There was plenty of discussion at the time Tim, but it’s not exactly the hot topic just now.
104. r0b 104

     25 September 2008 at 10:20 pm

     Incidentally Tim M, Tim E gave you some very good advice just now. He’s on your team too, so you maybe you can take a moment to ponder it.
105. Tim Millar 105

     25 September 2008 at 10:23 pm

     Tim Ellis – thanks for the advice. As I’ve just confessed, I did use the term pogrom in the wrong way (I used it from my memory of high school history which when I looked it up was incorrect). Context is a wonderful thing, a perfect example is my memory of Sunday School scripture: Jesus said “suffer little children”. Of course it is completely different when you add the rest of the sentence.
     I’m not realistically expecting a justification of Labour Policy. I actually think the majority of their policy is ok. I’ve got both of my children in Kiwisaver (as well as us parents) and would be quite annoyed if National did away with it. I’m not here saying ‘Go National”, I’m here asking what is best for Kiwis?
     I do think there is something underhanded going on with the Labour leadership at the moment, and I do think if we don’t have a change this time, even if it’s just for one term, then we’ll let them have too much power and they’ll continue to take away our rights.
     That’s my take on it, not from a National point of view, I haven’t lied about anything I’ve said (except for the pogrom comment which wasn’t an intentional lie), I have been a Labour supporter since I could vote (22 years ago) but that faith has eroded steadily in the last 3 years.
106. r0b 106

     25 September 2008 at 10:28 pm

     I’m not realistically expecting a justification of Labour Policy.

     Well apart from the fact that most of the authors here are Greenies, I don’t see why you should think that Labour policy can’t be discussed.

     Both you Tims have it a bit wrong in fact – what gets short shrift on The Standard is accusations that this blog is run by Labour / “the 9th floor” (as if). That gets annoying after the 200th denial and explanation. But Labour’s policy is perfectly fair game.
107. Tim Millar 107

     25 September 2008 at 10:30 pm

     rOb, I’m sure the relatives of those who have died on waiting lists would be comforted by the international surveys. Now do your Benny Hill impression for me again please, I miss him so much.
108. r0b 108

     25 September 2008 at 10:34 pm

     rOb, I’m sure the relatives of those who have died on waiting lists would be comforted by the international surveys.

     People die in the private health system too Tim. No country is ever going to fund a health system where there aren’t waiting lists, and people don’t die.

     So it happens, and every single one is an individual tragedy, but it doesn’t change the fact that we have a world class public health system that is remarkably cost effective.

     Now do your Benny Hill impression for me again please, I miss him so much.

     Don’t be a twit. Bored now, I think I’ll go and deliver some pamphlets. An activist’s work is never done!
109. Tim Millar 109

     25 September 2008 at 10:44 pm

     rOb, while I accept there is never going to be a perfect health system (or a perfect government for that matter) I do think we can do better than we have got, at the very least in the health system. To accept that it is flawed is not good enough in my mind, and if there’s a political party that says it can do better than what we have then I’m prepared to listen to them.
110. randal 110

     25 September 2008 at 10:49 pm

     well tim millar you should join a political party instead of bleating on a blog. how much good is that going to do? Oh and I never voted national and I never will and they are going to LOSE this lection
111. Tim Millar 111

     25 September 2008 at 10:53 pm

     randal
     September 25, 2008 at 10:15 pm

     tim millar I dont care a tinkers toss what you think or who you voted for and four five buck notes buys a foil wrapped pipe dream so do yourself a favout and lighten up.

     i sure hope my taxes aren’t supporting your insidious vices randal, that would just be the icing on the bleeding labour cake wouldn’t it?
112. Tim Millar 112

     25 September 2008 at 11:08 pm

     So now I’ve had an epiphany (thanks randal), I’ll support any party who introduces drug testing for beneficiaries. Time to start campaigning.
113. Tim Ellis 113

     25 September 2008 at 11:11 pm

     Well apart from the fact that most of the authors here are Greenies, I don’t see why you should think that Labour policy can’t be discussed.

     I understand this is a sensitive issue r0b but as much as a number of commenters and authors claim to be Green supporters instead of Labour Party supporters, I suspect that claim is made out of convenience. There is an uncanny resemblance between Labour Party attack lines and authors’ posts on here on a daily basis. I don’t say that they are acting under direction, but it seems to me to be very convenient when you’re running almost exclusively Labour Party attack lines that mirror what Labour MPs are saying, and very rarely running any of the Green Party attack lines (as seen at the openly Green Party-affiliated frogblog), then I think the claim to be Green affiliated is quite hollow.

     Some people declare their affiliations, and they have every right to withhold them if they wish. The About section of this blog makes it very clear that the authors are part of the broad labour movement, which obviously includes the Labour Party, the Greens, and the Progressives. It just stretches credibility for people to take on the responsibility of running Labour attack lines and then hiding behind Green Party affiliation when they’re called out on it.

     Genuine Green Party bloggers don’t, on the whole, run interference on behalf of the Labour Party 99% of their time, only promoting Green Party policies for 1% of their time. Nor do Act Party supporters run interference for the National Party 99% of their time, only promoting Act policies and people 1% of the time.

     The last time Steve Pierson wrote a post mentioning Jeanette Fitzsimons in the main post? August 22. Total number of Green posts by all authors at the Standard in the last 3 months? 7.

     I don’t doubt that most of the authors have strong Green sympathies, and would most like to see Labour in a coalition with the Greens and the Progressives, but they appear to me to be very much Labour first, Green second.
114. randal 114

     25 September 2008 at 11:21 pm

     tim millar you do what you like. only co-dependents base their actions on what others do. and I still never voted national and I still never will. I might perhaps if they drug test for idiocy?
115. Tim Millar 115

     25 September 2008 at 11:31 pm

     Randal, a drug test for idiocy? I think we can take your results as a gimme…
116. randal 116

     25 September 2008 at 11:37 pm

     blather on , National is still going to lose the election and in fact they will be drubbed badly. the electorate does not trust them and are very suspicious of ther secret agenda.
117. Tim Millar 117

     25 September 2008 at 11:43 pm

     I accept that could happen randal and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if National don’t get the majority of the votes. As pointed out earlier one of the biggest dangers to our future could be if National did get a majority that enabled them to govern alone, i.e. without any other party in coalition with them to apply the brakes.
     Anyway, hope you’re enjoying your wacky backie, at least you’re self medicating.
118. randal 118

     25 September 2008 at 11:49 pm

     National will get trounced because they are basically a gang of thieves and malcontents who are living out their id impulses of childish juvenile omnipotence and unlimited power. I.e. they are spoilt brats who think reality should conform to their wishes and invariably spit the dummy when they get their noses pushed in the mud.
119. r0b 119

     25 September 2008 at 11:56 pm

     Total number of Green posts by all authors at the Standard in the last 3 months? 7 … they appear to me to be very much Labour first, Green second.

     Base rate fallacy Tim. Check out the proportions in almost any other blog or publication.

     Or in other words, Labour have the ball. They are the government. Of course the issues are government / Labour related.

     Here’s a novel idea – why not just take the authors at their word?

     Goodnight.
120. Tim Ellis 120

     25 September 2008 at 11:57 pm

     Randal, keep chanting that to yourself and you’ll eventually believe it. It won’t make me believe you, though, when all the evidence says otherwise.
121. randal 121

     26 September 2008 at 12:05 am

     I am not asking you to beleive me. My ego is not that big. On a simple comaparison of Labours record and policies and Nationals no record and NO policies then Labour will shoo in. YOu might try giving the old NAG some ‘blue magic’ but that won’t do the trick either.
122. Tim Ellis 122

     26 September 2008 at 12:11 am

     Base rate fallacy Tim. Check out the proportions in almost any other blog or publication.

     Or in other words, Labour have the ball. They are the government. Of course the issues are government / Labour related.

     Is this right? r0b, have you looked at frogblog recently? Let’s look at recent topics:

     1. Melamine contamination
     2. TVNZ webpoll on trustworthy politicians (and how there’s no Green name)
     3. Erythrosine
     4. How to green your coffee
     5. Bob Clarkson’s contribution to Parliament
     6. Invite Greens to ask Labour candidates whether they would prefer a coalition with NZ First or the Greens
     7. Walking to work
     8. Drivers who hit cyclists
     9. Russel Norman’s speech in Parliament on the Privileges Committee
     10. National’s forestry policy

     These are Green Party authors, writing about Green issues. I didn’t cherry-pick the list: that is the last ten posts they have written.

     That is why I take the individual claims from authors who write almost exclusively Labour Party attack lines that they are actually Green supporters, with a grain of salt.
123. Tim Ellis 123

     26 September 2008 at 12:16 am

     I am not asking you to beleive me. My ego is not that big. On a simple comaparison of Labours record and policies and Nationals no record and NO policies then Labour will shoo in. YOu might try giving the old NAG some ‘blue magic’ but that won’t do the trick either.

     Randal, I beg to differ. You can keep repeating that Labour has so much policy, and National has no policy, but that doesn’t make it true. Labour have released how many policy documents this year? I don’t know. None of them are available on Labour’s websites. I haven’t seen a single one published. There may have been one or two, but none that I can find. How many policies has National released this year? So far, about 30.

     I base my prediction on eighteen months of consistent polling that has shown National to be well ahead of Labour. I know you’re a genuine Labour supporter, and you really, really want Labour to win. But honestly, just saying they will win because Labour is good and National is evil when your party is so far behind in the polls, isn’t the best campaign strategy I’ve ever heard.
124. Savage 124

     26 September 2008 at 2:23 am

     I’m not sure who’s going to win. I don’t think Labour or National will win enough to govern alone. I don’t put much faith in the polls as I don’t think that asking 416 people out of 3,000,0000 or so gives any kind of accurate indication.

     I’m not a Labour supporter but I will vote Labour. This is not because I like Labour but because I distrust National and John Key. He just looks so damned slippery.I wouldn’t buy a car off that man.
125. Savage 125

     26 September 2008 at 2:41 am

     LOL. I have just read all posts by Tim Millar. A Pogrom is where they round up all the Jewish people and kill them. Those continental types have words for everything.

     Note to Tim. If unsure of a word wiki it first. That is all.
126. travellerev 126

     26 September 2008 at 2:46 am

     Pascal’s bookie

     “I used to support the Democrat party but 9/11 changed everything and now I’m pissed off about chappaquiddick.’

     Mate, I am so going to enjoy saying I told you so in a couple of months.
127. Draco T Bastard 127

     26 September 2008 at 3:39 am

     Tim Millar:

     I’m sure the relatives of those who have died on waiting lists would be comforted by the international surveys.

     What did they die of?
     Just because someone dies on a surgery waiting list doesn’t mean it was the lack of surgery that killed them. This is the implication that comes with these accusations and it is complete BS and utterly contemptible.
128. Felix 128

     26 September 2008 at 7:34 am

     Well look at that. Tim Millar managed to keep that whole thread tied up in absolute bullshit all day.

     One guy.

     Think of all that could have been achieved with that time and electricity instead of wasting it on that simpleton.
129. Go The Right 129

     26 September 2008 at 8:16 am

     As we wake up to a beautiful day today we cant help but be sorry for the man that lost his life last night in down town Auckland.

     The facts arent out yet but Im prepared to make a prediction that this will be another Mental Patient on release with little supervision that has committed this crime.

     That would probably take the number up to about 7 murders since Labours time in office from this particular section of the community.

     Was also good to see Dover Samuel’s tell it like it is in Parliament yesterday in regards to all the PC crap that has been brought in by the Labour led Government no doubt prescribed by Heather Simpson endorsed by Helen Clark. Here is a wee bit for you

     Meanwhile departing Labour MP Dover Samuel’s is having a swipe at what he sees as PC nonsense over treaty claims. He made the attack in his valedictory speech to Parliament last night. Mr Samuel’s says we have become so politically and culturally correct we now have Black Power filing a Treaty claim on the grounds colonization is responsible for their criminal ways. He says next we will see the Mongrel Mob lay a Treaty claim to the Reserve Bank.

     I don’t know if you noticed wasn’t it great to see a school say its bringing back bull-rush again. However sadly not a State school as they are firmly under the thumb of the Femdoms. Roll on Nov 8
130. Phil 130

     26 September 2008 at 12:27 pm

     Sometimes you come across as really thick, the previous is one of them.
     If someone acts and talks like a used car salesman you vote for him yeah good idea. Duh.

     Trav,

     Sometimes you come across as a sanctimonious cow. If someone acts and talks like you, I’m sure as hell not voting for them.
131. Quoth the Raven 131

     26 September 2008 at 12:33 pm

     Go the Right – Have a look at some crime stats the number of murders a year has been dropping.
132. travellerev 132

     26 September 2008 at 12:49 pm

     He Phil,

     How do you like the outlook of the US financial world today.

     The meltdown of a Quadrillion (1000 trillion) in speculative bonds and derivatives. Not pretty.

     Oh oops, the same bonds and derivatives that John Key’s bonds and Derivatives department developed.

     Oh Oops, the same Bonds and derivatives that earned him $50 million.
     Oh Oops, the same bonds an derivatives that caused hundreds of thousands of pensioners and mum and pap investors here in NZ to loose their savings and investments.

     In the US they are calling for the arrest of the Wall street scheisters and here you want to vote one in. How f&^cking stupid is that.

     Sanctimonious cow, my ass.
133. Jasper 133

     26 September 2008 at 1:45 pm

     Lew – No, haven’t seen it yet.

     Eve – can you find the conspiracy theory in this “John Key says that he worked with Andrew Kreiger at Bankers Trust for around 6 months , after he started at BT in January 1988
     Yet, the NY Times of February 22 1988 states that Andrew Kreiger left BT on the 21st Feb.
     So… 6 months working with Andrew Kreiger? Sure.. if you want to take into consideration the period July 1987 – January 1988.. which means Key would have had a part to play in the currency attack.
134. travellerev 134

     26 September 2008 at 2:04 pm

     Jasper,

     I wrote a post on that part of the timeline of John Key’s career.
     In this post I also link to two interviews with Krieger one of them in the NY Times of 1990. He left the Bankers trust on the date you state, and he left trading altogether until 1990 after a shirt spell as a manager for Soros from march 1988 until June 1988.

     I Don’t know why you call it a conspiracy theory.

     He lied about the timeline, that’s a fact.

     He lied about when he worked with Andrew Krieger, that’s a fact.

     Why did he lie? I don’t know but the NZherald states twice that he only went to work with Krieger after the attack so my guess is that John Key is afraid that having been the account manager for the trader who almost tanked the NZ economy 20 years ago is perhaps not a good look for the man who wants the bring NZ to greatness.

     Was he his account manager? Well both he and his boss both state that he was at some stage the sole manager and they were dealing in tens of millions and huge trades.
     So I think it’s pretty obvious that he dealt with him at the time of the attack.
135. Ms M 135

     26 September 2008 at 3:26 pm

     Jasper

     I don’t think John Key even knows where he was in 87, but if dares to remember he’ll find himself in bit of a bind.

     He states he was trading during the attack on the $ but he swears on his flip flops that he was not at the Bankers Trust. So if he was not at the Bankers Trust then he must have still being with Elders Finance Group in Wellington putting him squarely in the middle of the Equiticorp’s H-Fee fiasco. But he swears he was gone by lunchtime three months before H-Fee was concocted, in the same statement says the he was gone by lunchtime from Elders three months before the NZ Steel sale.

     So where do you put yourself if you are John Key? On ‘three months gardening’ leave.

     Me, my monies on him being a Bankers Trust during the run on the kiwi, but Equiticorp, Elders IXL, Beid and BHP were cooking their stuff up since early 1986.

     So I’ll take a bob each way.
136. Go The Right 136

     27 September 2008 at 3:21 pm

     Fantastic article by Simon Collins

     Showing why National will win on Nov the 8th and the swing to the right from core Labour voters.

     Its like I have always maintained they haven’t been looking after their biggest base of voters the Blue Collar workers and have been to busy playing around the edges with fringe Social Engineering Policies for the Rainbow brigade which has had to much say.

     I actually think the result for Labour this Election will be similar to what Happened to Shipley in her down fall. Makes good reading on a Saturday.

     http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10534429&pnum=5

Links to post

1. I agree with The Standard « Something should go here, maybe later.: posted on 25 September 2008 at 9:01 pm
2. The Standard 2.01: The Standard Week: 19-26 September: posted on 27 September 2008 at 5:01 pm

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS