Hard News: Why we thought what we thought
287 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 Newer→ Last
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
Did anyone actually watch the thing?
Saw a bit and unfortunately JK was on a roll and I turned it off when as simon g said ....JK: BLAH BLAH BLAH, WHATEVER WHATEVER!
.....DC : We want to help the poor. (Boo groan groan from the front rows in the Audience) -
izogi, in reply to
Saw a bit and unfortunately JK was on a roll and I turned it off
Cunliffe was on FirstLine this morning, complaining that Key was making stuff up about Labour’s CGT policy and he had to give Key the benefit of the doubt on the night without being able to check. That’s all I know of the debate.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
JK was on a roll...
He was quite the 'ham'!
the 'whatevers' were particularly egregious
especially for an alleged 'adult!'Cunliffe dismissed him at one point
as a 'schoolyard larrikin'
- that was right on the money!Key acts like that kid in your class that disrupted everything all the time, and ultimately marred your education, as they chewed up time and patience...
-
Nora Leggs, in reply to
in some cases the froth becomes
the ‘head’ of the country… -
izogi, in reply to
Key acts like that kid in your class that disrupted everything all the time, and ultimately marred your education, as they chewed up time and patience…
I've been reliably informed by the National Party that he's talking about policy.
-
Cecelia, in reply to
That was what I thought about the debate in a poetic little nutshell. Key seemed to have morphed into Muldoon. Not drunk, surely? Hyped himself up to win over the audience with his famed sense of humour? He made David Cunliffe look statesman-like - a major gaffe and unmade points notwithstanding.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
Key acts like that kid in your class that disrupted everything all the time, and ultimately marred your education, as they chewed up time and patience…
That's Question Time also. I had oft' thought. If he gets no questions he'd spit the dummy. Would have liked to have seen that put to the test. When Labour took on the strategy of not rising to his bait ,he looked quite dejected or as he would probably think....."I'm refuted, I'll have to reject that". But his larrikin behaviour showed up most when he thought he had something on DC. He would jump out of his seat to try weasle goss in. ""Well I cant tell you about that ,but what I can tell you is CUNLIFFE'S GOT PRIVATE TRUSTS HA HA!" ( info probably from his oriffice via Jason Ede)
-
anth, in reply to
It included English? Interesting! Anything else you can recall?
That was the only bit that stood out.
The rest of what I remember:
How likely are you to vote?
Which party would you vote for if the election was tomorrow?
How likely are you to vote for a different party?
... and who would that be?
Which party do you think of for each of this long list of phrases? The only one that really sticks in my mind was "which party would best crack down on crime", because I think reducing crime is important but cracking down isn't necessarily the same thing.
What is the biggest issue for you this election?
The demographic questions were employment status and number of children. I don't think I've done one of these before where they didn't ask for income band. -
Speaking of our leaders displaying dignity:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10451707/Judith-Collins-Cunliffe-is-a-moron
The full article is quite funny, in a head-shaking kind of way.
Warning: may give you a Jilted John earworm (old person music reference ...)
-
Bart Janssen, in reply to
I WIN THIS THREAD. WHATEVER.
When can we get a favourite button?
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
The full article is quite funny, in a head-shaking kind of way.
Her upside was she got to campaign in her electorate - wasn't she planning on that prior to this...
The delusions and entitlement are strong in this one....It is an odd situation when our comedians make more sense than our sitting politicians -
Michele A'Court nails it today - I think she should run the country and leave Key to the Bad Comedy Halls. -
Roger Lacey, in reply to
The delusions and entitlement are strong in this one….
+1
Michele A’Court nails it today
Does she ever.
-
Craig Ranapia, in reply to
Cunliffe was on FirstLine this morning, complaining that Key was making stuff up about Labour’s CGT policy and he had to give Key the benefit of the doubt on the night without being able to check.
Obvious response: Cunliffe should actually have known his own policy (and one IIRC he developed while finance spokesman before the last election) well enough to zing Key right back. As I've said repeatedly, I don't mark politicians down for saying "I don't know" or "I'll have to check that out". But you don't get to have it both ways, because I'm damn certain that if the shoe was on the other food Cunliffe would have been finding various polite ways to suggest the Prime Minister harden the fuck up and do his prep instead of whining. Or if you're taking it to the next level, artlessly muse about what secret agenda National doesn't want to talk about. That's always fun.
Key seemed to have morphed into Muldoon. Not drunk, surely? Hyped himself up to win over the audience with his famed sense of humour?
OK, so he's either "tired and bitter" or drunk? I know Key doesn't have many fans around here, but the innuendo along those lines is pretty distasteful no matter who it's directed at.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
unless, that is, you wanted to use time as the fourth dimension
and
plot all the current election and polling data onto the surface of a four-dimensional hypercube
I'm not suggesting anything so exotic. That one would need to is argument enough not to do it that way.
I'm talking about making a one-dimensional plot using all the data. You sit on the left edge, and any characters of interest to you are plotted along a line in order (and proportionally) to how far away from you they are. The Euclidean distance is a good start on how to quantify that.
It might also be of interest to know the strongest contributing dimensions of the distance, so that you can grasp why their views are so far from yours. You might plot right on top of someone on the Political Compass, and yet find your distance from them is quite great, because you have profound disagreement with them in other directions.
For instance, my distance from Winston Peters is not really a function of the two dimensions we see there. He's miles away from me in some racist homophobic dimension you can't see there. Similarly Peter Dunne is a long way from me on account of his main contribution to politics, drug policy, on which I despise his stance, even though his position is quite moderate on the plotted dimensions. And Colin Craig might look close to National on that graph, but if you emphasized aspects of his religiousity and belief in science, I think the gap would be a lot bigger.
-
simon g, in reply to
Watch the first part of the debate, Craig. "Incoherent" would be kind.
No, I don't think he was drunk, but if he was stone-cold sober, that's kinda worse.
-
Incidentally it is looking awfully like granny Herald has spat the dummy, tossed in the towel , thrown her hands in the air & walked off in a hissy fit. There have been weeks and weeks of comment threads jampacked with pissed off kiwis expressing their anger at the obvious corruption of the Key mob and the Herald just sorta let them be. I imagine because they have worked out the usual heavy handed censorship they used to engage in and call 'moderation' wouldn't have played well with the electoral commish during campaign season.
Anyway as of yesterday that seems to be no more. Many of the 'opinion' i.e. rightwing claptrap posing as normal columns, disappear from their opinions page several hours after going up with absolutely no trace of the threads that are attached.
Going on precedent they are doubtlessly full of citizens' ire.Mebbe their moderator is having a sickie. I seem to remember that was one of the functions APN relocated to Oz and as we all know the tradition of Monday morning turning into Tuesday, sickies still lives across the ditch.
That of course poses an interesting question about how the hell some Melbourne trainee copyperson knows enough about Kiwi politics to moderate effectively.I kinda prefer the view that the APN execs are tired of copping shit from their National Party cobbers and have pulled the pin on commenting. It will certainly backfire if they have.
-
A factor in all this that keeps disappointing me is the role of news organisations. Besides assorted internet news sites, my main source of "audio news" is National Radio. I've been disappointed with how much presenters seem to have been concentrating on who "scored points" in a debate. I presume that there's research showing this sort of thing can influence elections, but can't help wondering if this is partly because news organisations make a feature of it.
And even though media organisations seem to acknowledge the "horse race" nature of election coverage, it doesn't appear to have actually caused them to change the style of their coverage.
While some people are having "great fun" with politics and the election process, decisions are being made about my personal freedoms and opportunities.
I hope I'm more likely to be swayed by facts than rhetoric: I'd like to see more of this reflected in news coverage, and less about "who won on points" or who made whom look silly.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
because I’m damn certain that if the shoe was on the other food Cunliffe would have been finding various polite ways to suggest the Prime Minister harden the fuck up and do his prep instead of whining.
That was how it was in the first debate and Cunliffe did no such thing. Cunliffe has tried to stay on message ,Labour that is and Labour Policy, between Key telling porkies about the opposition. National are very happy to tell the public what's wrong with Labour because they have no policy to talk about .
-
stephen clover, in reply to
In real time I actually really felt that Cunliffe was trying to answer the OG question from the moderator (or the floor?) and not get sucked into tit-fer-tat with Key. But suddenly he looked like he didn't know the answer.
-
stephen clover, in reply to
National are very happy to tell the public what's wrong with Labour because they have no policy to talk about .
Indeed! One of the most disappointing things about Key was that at one point when asked from the floor for "specifics" of various new policies, he spent his allotted time decrying Labour policies from a decade ago.
-
Richard Aston, in reply to
He made David Cunliffe look statesman-like – a major gaffe and unmade points notwithstanding.
Yes I noticed that , Key did the school yard larriken thing and showed us that nasty little side we see in Parliament debates , he seemed obsessed with "beating" labour
and as you said Cecelia David Cunliffe looked quite statesman like in comparison even to the point of acknowledging National had done a good job of getting through the recession .
The production values were bloody aweful through , audio levels all over the place , the intros were far too long and it was very hard for me to hear what Press Editor was saying.
I think Cunliffe did really well and it restored my faith a little . -
Cecelia, in reply to
Not innuendo. I wouldn't be surprised if Key was cracking under the strain of Dirty Politics and the ways it's developing. If he wasn't literally drunk, he had cast himself in a silly, schoolboy role which was most unbecoming of a PM. Last time people said, "Why wasn't John Key as funny as usual?" So he wound himself up to be funny and overdid it.
Or was it meant to be a schoolboy debate? Maybe I missed the point?
-
a clutch of straws...
instead of whining...
Shouting 'Show me the Money!'
or 'Whatever, whatever...'
is way more déclassé. -
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
The AC / DC knitting book...
he had cast himself in a silly, schoolboy role which was most unbecoming of a PM.
purls before swine - pt II
[edit: Pull those socks up boy!]
-
After the last few weeks and the first debate, Key needed a performance that re-energised the base. Hard-core Nat supporters love his snarky wit and put-downs, and they gave Key a clear win. He definitely did what was needed there.
Not so sure it will have worked on swing voters. Cunliffe is auditioning for Prime Minister, and he played that fairly well – apart from the one moment. Labour’s problem is we may see that one moment again and again, and it will play poorly.
When the core narrative was controlled by National, it was all about Cunliffe being tricky, unlikeable, or gaffe-prone. So the slightest gaffe was amplified.
But they don’t control the story now. It could go anywhere over the next two weeks. I don’t think McCarten or Joyce will be getting much sleep.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.