Cracker: All In
128 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
If one of the heads was Douglas, it wouldn't be Cerberus, but some sort of dinosaur. (Somehow oblivious of a fact blatantly obvious to everyone else - that it's already extinct, thrashing and wailing as it sinks ever deeper into a tar pit.)
-
I'm voting left, but I'd still bet right.
That is: to form a government. Odds on the government lasting 3 years, around 5-1. On John Key lasting that long: 100-1.
On t'other hand, if NZ First is in, and Clark gets her monster, the Nats can romp home next time.
But in either case, instant gratification will beat long-term strategy. Not least because the interests of the parties and the needs of the leaders have very different time-frames.
-
Umm? May be an Anus on legs to you Craig but a vote for NZF could be an out and out strategic vote for Labour which in an area like mine is being discussed quite a bit.
What you and your acquaintances do to their secret ballot in the privacy of a voting booth is their own affair. But anyone who is going to play craps with a habitual and pathological liar, a racist and someone whose social and economic policies give reactionaries a bad name...
Well, I'd say you deserve every damn thing you get, but the rest of us will have to live with it as well.
-
Leg Break: I wouldn't hold my breath on Rimutaka. NZF mustered 5% of the party vote and 3.2% of the candidate vote there last time. Even with a stronger NZF candidate and Paul Swain retired, it'll be a hard road for them.
-
And, Sofie, if you're seriously thinking about casting your party vote for NZ First in the belief that it would be of strategic benefit to Labour, please ask your local candidate what policy concessions they'd support. The racist immigration policy? Gutting the Reserve Bank Act? Privatising Kiwibank? Making Ron Mark a very happy chap indeed?
-
DC,
But if the hint went out from Labour HQ late next week that a strategic vote was in order… Apparently it’s already being talked about on the train (which is where the Thinking Person’s Upper Hutt congregates).
Remember how Bolger shafted the Nat candidate in Wgtn Central just before the 96 election?
-
I'm completely sick of the media asking John Key a thousand variations on "are you definitely not going to rely on the NZF vote? really? like, super really?" question, but does anyone know if he has specifically been posited: Labour led-coalition on 59, National-led coalition on 59, Winnie says "righto John, I'll give you those 2 seats of mine". Will he really say no and let Labour lead the next government. Like, super really?
-
So, small hands an'all, Whaddaya mean Craig?
-
Gareth, yes, it hinges on what "coalition" means, doesn't it. The Greens aren't in coalition with Labour, they're just voting yes on confidence and supply. If that's what it takes, I'm sure we'll hear lots of parsing from John Key as NZF slithers in the back way.
-
So, small hands an'all, Whaddaya mean Craig?
Vote for New Zealand First, whatever your motivations, you better be perfectly clear what you're voting for -- and pray we're not all going to live to regret it. As I've said on another thread, if Winston hasn't thrown his toys out of the coalition cot after Bolger had been rolled I would either have voted Labour (with a clothes peg on my nose) or not at all. That's how deep my contempt for Winston Peters and his squalid personality cult is.
And for Gareth Ward, I don't think I'm the only National Party supporter that if Key isn't super sure enough any further correspondence from the Party will be going straight in the bin. And, as in 1999, my vote will be going elsewhere in 2011.
Super really.
-
Sofie
I think you should vote for who you really support, rather than take a tactical risk. But that's your call.
You might find this useful: put in your own views, and see where the parties stand. It's good fun!
http://glassbooth.org/home/election/5/
Personally, I think there's a hell of a difference between a tactical vote for a party that is close to my views (e.g. second preference) and voting for a party that is way off - as NZ First would be, for me. You gotta still respect yourself in the morning.
-
I wonder if Craig ever sees anything at all in shades of Grey? It is a very easy place to be black and white,good and evil, beautiful and ugly. However I have not heard Sofie say she would vote NZF, nor I, but I resent Craig, Bill Ralston, Hooten screaming at any person who has a different perspective. I resent the power of the Media being used to pander to the black and whiters.
-
You gotta still respect yourself in the morning.
Indeed, Mr G. And in National's case, someone should remember my favourite definition of insanity: Doing the same old shit all over again and expecting a different result.
-
I wonder if Craig ever sees anything at all in shades of Grey?
Plenty, Ian. Getting users and wasters the fuck out of my life is not one of them. You know one circumstance under which I would welcome a fourth term Labour government with a smile? Winston Raymond Peters returned to the public sector where his bigoted filth has no more weight than that of any other citizen.
I'd like to think Sofie and I have enormous respect for each other, but that's also based on having enough respect to be blunt when its called for. And I seriously and sincerely believe -- and have done for almost twenty years -- that Winston Peters has been a truly cancerous and corrosive presence in political life. I'd also seriously and sincerely beg any thoughtful and good-natured person (which I'd certainly include Sofie in that rank) thinking of taking a 'strategic' crap shoot on NZ First to think again, AND JUST DON'T DO IT.
-
Gareth, yes, it hinges on what "coalition" means, doesn't it. The Greens aren't in coalition with Labour, they're just voting yes on confidence and supply.
I did hear Key was specifically asked around abstentions and the like and he still said "no way" (can't find the source at the moment sorry). So by all coverage I've heard there is no way he'd utilise NZF support (in whatever form) to maintain a National Govt.
Craig, I guess that should the highly unlikely (but still quite plausible) scenario I posited play out, Key will either be an electoral hero (relegate National to opposition for the sake of not dealing with NZF) or a complete pariah (accept it as "the only way we could make Govt") to me. No real middle ground there!
-
Hey Damien: did you know this was on its way when you posted?
I wonder if it will impact the "Honest John" image?
-
Because, Ian, your 'strategic' vote might well get you the government you like, but if it's tight enough and Winston's vote is critical enough the price. A racist immigration policy? Preparing Kiwibank for privatisation and gutting the Reserve Bank Act? Eroding our civil liberties and restraints on Police powers even faster than they have been over the last term -- but not fast enough for Ron Mark?
Sorry if saying bluntly that that's a crazy risk to take raises your resentment. But I think we're all grown up enough to take it, and I don't think anything I said could reasonably be read as a personal attack on Sofie.
-
I wonder if it will impact the "Honest John" image?
I'm wondering if this is going to backlash on Labour and any media outlet that touches it.
-
Craig: I for one enjoy your wit and imagery and read it in many forums. (I do not think I ever talked about a strategic vote for me as in our Electorate there is not much chance of change. I suppose it could be implied.) Am great believer in the freedom of speech too but I can be annoyed at bigotry, which is surely prejudice against a person or party, with no greyness allowed. Your comments re Kiwibank, Reserve Bank etc is clearly stated by Peters, but are similar plans possible from other more vaguely worded Parties. Privatization for example?
-
Am great believer in the freedom of speech too but I can be annoyed at bigotry, which is surely prejudice against a person or party, with no greyness allowed.
In the end, I absolutely respect the one poll that really counts. if Peters wins Tauranga and/or New Zealand First gets five percent or more of the valid party votes, I'll swallow hard and get on with my life.
I also absolutely respect our universal franchise and secret ballot. As I said, what a qualified elector does to a valid ballot paper in private -- and why they do it -- is their business.
There are also plenty of parties that I respect while vehemently disagreeing with them. I certainly know plenty of ACTivists, Maori Party supporters) and Greenies -- even the odd Labour supporter :) -- I find honest and honourable, if somewhat politically misguided. :)
But, fairly or not, I just can't swallow New Zealand First or Peters. Perhaps that makes me a terrible person, but I just can't honestly see any "greyness" It just too nearly fits Henry Adams' description of politics as the "the systematic organization of hatreds."
-
I'm wondering if this is going to backlash on Labour and any media outlet that touches it.
It will be interesting to see the details and the spin then applied - that Herald article doesn't really say much that's damning to me, except the "I definitely left before the payments were made" line he made when clearly he hadn't.
As to what each side really thinks that means will be an interesting (and possibly nauseau inducing) look...
-
If that's what it takes, I'm sure we'll hear lots of parsing from John Key as NZF slithers in the back way.
Don't think so. The real reason Key is so adamant about not doing a deal with Winston is because of Rodney Hide's pathological hatred of Peters.
Key knows that he can't do a deal with both of them so he's picked Rodney and trying to pick up votes by categorically ruling out Winston.
-
The real reason Key is so adamant about not doing a deal with Winston is because of Rodney Hide's pathological hatred of Peters.
Nope, when it comes to people around Key who have an entirely rational desire not to get back in that abusive marriage of inconvenience, Rodders is at the back of a very long line.
-
The best thing that could happen for NZ politics would be for both Winston and Rodney to not be re-elected, which would leave them free to persue their rediculous, middle aged crisis of a feud out in the carpark.
-
Nope, when it comes to people around Key who have an entirely rational desire not to get back in that abusive marriage of inconvenience, Rodders is at the back of a very long line.
I'm sure that's the case Craig but not many of those other people are potential coalition partners for National
Post your response…
This topic is closed.