Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Metiria's Problem

376 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 Newer→ Last

  • Rob Stowell, in reply to simon g,

    The problem for the Greens is not that they will fall under the threshold, but that they – and therefore all of us – will miss out on some very good potential new MPs.

    Yep. I think they need about 7% to get both Chloe Swarbrick and Golriz Ghahraman into parliament (7 and 8 on the list, now Graham has gone.) Definitely worth voting for.
    But … I’m still gonna contend, if they consistently look like dropping below 5% on the night (it’s a tricky call, but we all make calculations like this) it’s reasonable to vote for the ‘next-best’ option – as long as that’s still a party you support/like enough/feel will make a positive change.
    As someone who’s happily voted Labour many times (tho not lately) and hopes to enjoy a Labour govt next year, right now it’s a pretty easy choice for me – and it would appear from the polls, many other Green voters.

    Whakaraupo • Since Nov 2006 • 2105 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to simon g,

    Ignoring the party lists is an endemic failure in our election coverage

    It's mostly trivia but yesterday I bothered to google position #75 on the National Party list, Graham Collins. The top result was this Herald article from late last year, where his accusation of physical assault against Michael Wood (whom he accused of manhandling Parmjeet Parmar's husband) was categorically disproved by video evidence of the event, as well as showing that Wood had been provoked.

    I get that #75 will almost certainly never be elected, even from National, but assuming the Herald's account is accurate, how does a destructive liar like this even get onto that party's list?

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to izogi,

    I wonder if the whole 5% thing in a poll must cause people to reconsider if they want to risk voting for a party that mightn't make it over.

    It's also equally plausible that enough people might look at a poll that leaves Labour every bit as beholden as National to a bigot and his personality cult with zero counter-balance and decide not to risk it.

    I know this is not the narrative Labour and the Greens Derangement Syndrome afflicted punditocracy are going all in on, but still...

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to Rob Stowell,

    I think they need about 7% to get both Chloe Swarbrick

    I'd heard about Auckland's local election, but it wasn't really until Backbenches on Wednesday that I saw Chlöe Swarbrick speaking for the first time. I was impressed with just how informed and assertive she was with the issues she was confronted with. Not every candidate nor MP can pull that off.

    It's probably easy for someone who looks for excuses to write her off as as young wannabe who came third in Auckland because of the electoral system, but if she can have an opportunity of getting into Parliament it'd be awesome, imho. She comes across as a genuine future leader.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    I think you have it there.

    Personally, I'm just going to do something weird and vote for the party whose policies I most agree with.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • Rich of Observationz,

    Which might have been the Greens, but they lost my vote for:

    - dumping Metiria. Frankly, I don't care if she spend her teenage summers interning for the Baader Meinhof. She was their most effective MP and James Shaw is not.
    - supporting the repeal of health and safety legislation preventing people going into dangerous mines so that people can go into a dangerous mine and search for corpses. It's a minor issue, but it indicates they favour dumb populism over rational policy.

    Not to mention that if the Greens do get 5%, and Labour are in a position to form a government with NZF, then I can fully see them being dumped at the instigation of Peters and then pliantly giving that government a free ride on confidence and supply.

    Back in Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 5550 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    they lost my vote for ... dumping Metiria

    Not that the method should change your view, but do you see it as the Greens having dumped her?

    There was obvious internal conflict (esp shown by Graham and Clendon's thing) and maybe that's what you're thinking of, but what I saw was a Greens' leadership that was prepared to stick it out and defend her vigorously in the face of a public that was looking for any random excuse to discredit the party by attacking her, until she decided to leave.

    For comparison, when National has problems it tends to be in the context of maybe 50% of the population looking for excuses to bag them, but another 50% looking for excuses to justify why it really doesn't matter. For the Greens it's more like a 85/15 split.

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • linger, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    It also seems perverse to think of punishing the Greens for something Winston First may do.

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1922 posts Report Reply

  • John Farrell,

    Dunedin • Since Nov 2006 • 496 posts Report Reply

  • linger,

    Meanwhile, what I would take from the poll result is that the Greens have wasted much of the media recognition they had built up. Metiria was a recognizable public face for the party. The other one (James Shaw?) is not yet as instantly recognizable a media presence. Even if the Greens cannot officially choose a new co-leader yet, they desperately need to have at least one more regular, recognizable, competent spokesperson to fill the media void (and Chloe would seem the most likely choice for that role).

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1922 posts Report Reply

  • warren mac, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    Not to mention that if the Greens do get 5%, and Labour are in a position to form a government with NZF, then I can fully see them being dumped at the instigation of Peters and then pliantly giving that government a free ride on confidence and supply.

    I think that's entirely possible. Even the Greens abstaining would get Labour/NZ First across the line. I doubt the Greens would vote against a change of government even though it would be painful to them to sit on the sidelines again.

    New Zealand • Since Sep 2014 • 9 posts Report Reply

  • mark taslov, in reply to linger,

    I had words to that effect last night with an offsider, though I’m yet to be convinced that Chlöe has the reach that they need right now.

    Whether in opposition or otherwise the coherent ethics that The Greens have brought to Parliament would be a huge loss for our country, another notch in neoliberalism’s belt.

    Running partners are du jour, the Greens co-leader thing helped promote this in NZ.

    .

    Te Ika-a-Māui • Since Mar 2008 • 2281 posts Report Reply

  • linger,

    being dumped at the instigation of Peters and then pliantly giving that government a free ride on confidence and supply

    Yes, it's possible; after all, it's happened before.
    But, what else would you have the Greens do?

    Peters doesn’t actually have to choose sides at all, of course. in some ways, sitting outside as an independently vocal opposition to a minority government, without any of the concomitant responsibilities of government, might be the best outcome for Peters at this stage in his career.

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1922 posts Report Reply

  • izogi, in reply to linger,

    Where do all those NZF supporters go once Winston Peters is eventually gone, anyway? Could the party even survive without him?

    Wellington • Since Jan 2007 • 1139 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    And this is why polls should be banned.

    They are increasingly wrong, both inaccurate, that is they fail to predict the actual result, and imprecise, that is they are so variable that anyone with any statistical experience dismisses them as nonsense.

    But they influence voters. So something utterly wrong changes people's votes and that should be banned.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4458 posts Report Reply

  • linger, in reply to izogi,

    The second question is much easier: NZF will vanish without Winston, as nobody else on their list has much media exposure or experience in office or even basic competence.
    Don't know where NZF supporters would turn next (though I would guess probably slightly more to National than to the Left).

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1922 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to warren mac,

    Even the Greens abstaining would get Labour/NZ First across the line. I doubt the Greens would vote against a change of government even though it would be painful to them to sit on the sidelines again.

    And so what? Let's write the reality check, Winston can stomp his little cloven hoof all he likes, but he's not the only game in town. I know there probably isn't enough political spine going spare these days, but Ardern and English could co-ordinate clear signals that if Winston wants to pout his way into a constitutional crisis that's his call. But he doesn't get to unilaterally dictate the shape of New Zealand's government from the back seat.

    If he doesn't take the hint, I'm sure voters would richly reward him for triggering a fresh election, or landing us with a minority government nobody's shown much stomach for before.

    Again, I know the punditocracy has gone all in on the "Winston King/Queenmaker" storyline. Doesn't mean anyone else has to play along.
    .

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • mark taslov, in reply to Rich of Observationz,

    that time the environment was crashing and burning while you were dancing on the grave of the green party

    Te Ika-a-Māui • Since Mar 2008 • 2281 posts Report Reply

  • linger,

    In a truly bizarre overreaction, I/S argues that the Greens should be aggressively pursuing electorate as well as party votes. That would only make any sense if there were at least one electorate that the Greens could hope to gain a plurality in; and it would only make sense within some such electorate(s). Otherwise it's a waste of their resources: if they can't win one electorate as a backup plan, then they absolutely need all the party vote share they can get.

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1922 posts Report Reply

  • warren mac, in reply to Craig Ranapia,

    Realpoltik. I'm not a NZ First fan by any stretch In fairness Last time Winston was in (or outside) of Government, he largely behaved himself before shooting himself in the foot. He likes the baubles too much. Plus there was that shafting National gave them in 08, and i'm not sure he wants to prop up a final term government again.

    New Zealand • Since Sep 2014 • 9 posts Report Reply

  • linger, in reply to mark taslov,

    Exactly. Whatever side of the house the Greens end up sitting on, our Parliament would be a much poorer place without those voices being heard at all. We need them to be there, and that may well mean voting for them.

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1922 posts Report Reply

  • mark taslov, in reply to linger,

    Te Ika-a-Māui • Since Mar 2008 • 2281 posts Report Reply

  • Trevor Nicholls,

    I do not want either the "let-us-keep-doing-what-we're-doing-and-if-it's-not-working-for-you-well-it-sucks-to-be-you" party or the "you'll-have-to-ask-Winston" party in government.
    The Greens' core policies are the only sane ones for the future.
    The Greens also have the most impressive top 10 list candidates of any party.
    It's kind of an easy choice.

    Wellington, NZ • Since Nov 2006 • 324 posts Report Reply

  • andin, in reply to Trevor Nicholls,

    +1

    raglan • Since Mar 2007 • 1890 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia, in reply to warren mac,

    Realpoltik.

    Ah, the fancy way of saying "there is no alternative" when you want to dodge responsibility for the alternative you've already chosen. YMMV, but I think we've got five weeks to not let Ardern and English slide on that one.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 11 12 13 14 15 16 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.