But yeh . . . I’ll take it
And in all fairness to you Farmer Green, you have made it your life’s work to contribute in a tangible way to these other pressing issues our planet faces, unlike countless others who couldn’t give an actual fuck about democracy or civil liberties and who without much ado besides a little faint-hearted bleating about these votes, these golden figures, iffy rolls, sheepish turnouts and magic numbers crunched, prattle on:
thanks for that Jonathan. I've been hunting figures for the number on the rolls in 2011 this evening for figuring turnout(elections.org only has the current roll). In the end I went to the wayback machine and got the figures "approximate" to the election.
You were there too?
You were there too?
The 1960s? Yep.
to contribute in a tangible way to these other pressing issues our planet faces,
I had a choice . The way of the bard was open - but . . . . what to say?
A good enough reason to get some dirt under one's nails, and one does get to eat -eventually.
Not strictly relevant, but racism and xenophobia are an issue.
And from a serving cop, no less, who you'd expect to maintain the law instead of breaking it.
And from a serving cop, no less, who you’d expect to maintain the law instead of breaking it.
They can be the worst.
you’d expect to maintain the law instead of breaking it.
Maybe, as a defensible New Zealand ‘moderate’ she just thought the guy was a Foreign Prick.
may the siècle be unbroken...
...towards the end of the second millenium
but the end of 'millennium' is double 'enned', innit?
There's the real Y2K bug!
it still bugs me...
Adjusting for the number of people on the roll (so as a proportion of the available electors rather than just raw numbers)
Electorates where National's vote went up:
"Hutt South" "Port Hills"
Electorates where Labour's vote went up:
Electorates where Green's vote went up:
"Helensville" "Mt Albert" "Mt Roskill"
Electorates where NZ First's vote went up:
"Auckland Central" "Bay of Plenty" "Botany" "Christchurch Central"
"Christchurch East" "Clutha-Southland" "Coromandel" "Dunedin North"
"Dunedin South" "East Coast" "East Coast Bays" "Epsom"
"Hamilton East" "Hamilton West" "Helensville" "Hunua"
"Hutt South" "Ilam" "Invercargill" "Kaikōura"
"Mana" "Māngere" "Manukau East" "Manurewa"
"Maungakiekie" "Napier" "Nelson" "New Lynn"
"New Plymouth" "North Shore" "Northcote" "Northland"
"Ōtaki" "Pakuranga" "Palmerston North" "Papakura"
"Port Hills" "Rangitata" "Rangitīkei" "Rimutaka"
"Rodney" "Rongotai" "Rotorua" "Selwyn"
"Tāmaki" "Taranaki-King Country" "Taupō" "Te Atatū"
"Tukituki" "Waikato" "Waimakariri" "Wairarapa"
"Waitaki" "Wellington Central" "West Coast-Tasman" "Whanganui"
What’s your take on why they lost it Steve, or why they didn’t win?
Well that’s a big question, I think Jack got it about right back on page 7:
The tax cuts they did were financed on our nations credit card. The modest tax hikes suggested are needed to cover our needed spending and because the original tax cuts are a drain on our economy. Cutting taxes in a recession for your core base is good politics, but fucking disastrous for our national accounts.
I don’t think this issue won them office in 2014. They won because they simplified the choice, socialist p.c nutters versus nice John. How they simplified it that way is a topic for much discussion.
There’ll be variations on epithets for the Left: socialist p.c. nutters to some, disorganised rabble to others, and for others it will be that they just don’t trust that smarmy guy who sometimes says some odd shit and many in his party don’t like.
And Dotcom, of course.
And I say this one with hindsight: the timing of the release of Hager’s book (should have been earlier).
All of that kind of thing was on one side. On the other: John Key. Perceived by many a centrist ‘swing’ voter as: nice, or competent, or down to earth, or moderate (he’s kept National from becoming too right wing, I have been told by a traditional Labour voter, so he doesn’t need to vote Labour at this stage and risk those Greens coming in and ruining the economy*).
So basically, many many people like or even love certain things about the left parties – certain policy ideas, or even a particular party. But the overall framing is that with the left you can’t get the good without the bad. The left lot have no John Key to keep us all safe from the excesses. So they look back to the right and see actual John Key and a government who they perceive has run a country kinda-sorta-pretty okayish despite some bad luck (earthquakes, world economic downturn) and as Craig suggested earlier, they get all small c conservative and vote for consistency.
And all the hullabaloo around dirty politics and spying and whatnot so close to an election just reinforced that they should vote positive. And vote positive, for many many people, was a vote to the nice, moderate, down to earth relaxed guy who has it all under control.
I also thought this commentary by the International Socialist Organisation was very useful.
(Although apparently Danyl McLauchlan thinks that giving this consideration is part of the problem.)
And this from Nandor.
* That anecdote is just one example of the problems he left faced. Traditional Labour voter with utterly irrational fears that the Greens just aren't a credible governing party, because ... printing money, or socialism, or something. To him, the Green Party are a niche party that doesn't get to seriously share power. That's just one attack line that's been used against the Greens, and supported to a degree by the systematic bias of the media. The absurdity of it is that the Grens are barely more left than Labour.
*problems the left faced. Edit window ran out.
Thanks Steve, that was very thorough, and for the links, both good reads, that Nandor’s always rung my bell.
On a lighter note, the Key Govt has made The Daily Show.
"enamie of enenem"
Yeah. Man ban is bullshit. I'd have been happy with a target of at least a third of caucus members being female. But the heroic thing to do would have been to develop systems of female candidate development. Spotting talent in the ranks and growing it. That's way better, and more credible, than a sudden 45% floor from out of nowhere.
we're so pretty, oh so pretty, legal...
the Key Govt has made The Daily Show
Jeez Joyce is a stand out ain't he...
If only Oliver and Stewart knew the rich picking s to be had from our political system and its shenanigans...
Electorates where National’s vote went up:
“Hutt South” “Port Hills”
Huh. And the main reason it went up in Port Hills would be the boundary changes, which were designed to do exactly that.
Sorry I am 18 pages late with this ( still wading my way thru the 20 pages ). I am pretty new to this excellent blog site.
Your comment re Mr. Mora struck a nerve. I have just made a Formal Complaint to Nat Radio about him. I heard a few weeks back one of his guests, I think her name was something like Denise from a Strange orbiting Planet, she was pouring obscene scorn on the poor. Usual stuff - get a job, plenty out there, stop spending on grog, fags etc...But what hurt most was when she said the poor should stop having babies. I also complained about other show host most notably the early morning attack chihuahua Guy On Something. I don't expect the unexpected in their reply but it seemed a more positive thing to do than taking an axe to my radio.
Reading through this and other threads it strikes me that there are so many onto it and intelligent posters here. You guys and gals should throw a party. Maybe call it the Sensible Party or I remember what NZ once was Party. Cheers.
An observation..a little off subject but it strikes me as odd that you do not need to show any ID when voting. I showed my line drawing person mine anyway, I told my guy this and showed him my ID anyway - he smiled pleasantly.
Aside from hacking how hard would it be ( yes I know it is illegal ), given 1/4 of eligible voters don't, to go round voting on their behalf? You would probably get a pretty good strike rate if you had done a bit of investigation beforehand on who your target non voters might be.
Living in the material world...
...a storm serge made its way several blocks inland
...and the very fabric of the land
'twill' ever be 'worsted'!
Suits you, sir!
</sorry, couldn't resist that image...>
yes but a rising tide of civil servants is more of a stereotypically Labour image .... in this case I assume this storm serge is caused by fired civil servants washing up on the tide
I accept your point that online voting would make that type of influence easier for an abuser. But don’t the males you’re describing already exert a high level of psychological control over their victims?
Aside from what Emma said, the issue’s also not limited to abuse. Any occasion when a voter thinks others might treat them differently if they vote in a certain way risks coercing them to vote in that way if there’s a possibility that others might find out how they’ve voted. And if it’s even possible to take away evidence of how you’ve voted, you can guarantee there will be coersion all over the place (whether friendly or malicious) for people to start showing off evidence of how they’ve voted.