Posts by Paul Williams
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Huh? I thought I was saying I don't expect the sky to fall if the government changes this year, and you seem to have me saying something different. Did I miss something?
Just that you seemed to preface your comments by quoting what I thought was a pretty ambitious attempt to divine Labour supporters' collective conciousness. I wondered why your comments were introduced this way?
Now I fear I'm being over-sensitive so I might just let it go...
-
When I made my comment, I was thinking about how much noise I heard about National's tactics at the 05 election (Exclusive Brethren, secret trusts) in the years afterwards. These were genuine issues, but after a certain point even people sympathetic to your arguments are tired of hearing them.
I can understand that George. I do think the EBs are a group that well and truly overstepped any reasonable mark and I think Brash erred in his dealings with them. I'm wary of Crosby/Textor too. I do however, hope this election is fought on issues of relevance to today.
-
First Danyl said:
__It seems to me that Labour party supporters at PAS are building themselves a narrative to explain their parties upcoming annihilation and the Cosby/Textor revelations feed right into that, providing an excuse for the left that poor old Labour will only lose because of some sort of satanic, right-wing media sorcery.__
Then George said:
__Indeed. The only thing worse than having National sweep into power and do things I find distasteful is having Labour hacks complain about their precious Government being "stolen" from them for months or years afterwards.__
And now Russell:
As I've said before, I expect a National-led government would be less to my taste, but not really that different. There's a fairly high degree of political consensus in this country -- although I think I was correct in feeling that was under threat from the people who clustered around Brash.
Meh, Danyl's idle speculation seems to have crystalised into genuine knowledge at an alarming rate. How do you do that?
-
The point of this, in my not so humble opinion, is that the major opposition party in NZ is engaging in an election strategy that relies on debating only the issues of its choosing, and keeping the public in the dark on everything else. That is the scandal.
Precisely. Which is why I've been banging on about the absence of policy over and over and over again. I notice that Stephen Franks has eschewed any discussion of policy on his blog instead prefering to quote the positions of others (interestingly others who often have positions you'd expect from ACT, not from National).
-
Indeed. The only thing worse than having National sweep into power and do things I find distateful is having Labour hacks complain about their precious Government being "stolen" from them for months or years afterwards.
Is this some harking back to 1993 or is there, outside an odd reinterpretation of a few posts here, some real evidence that Labour supporters have given up on the election in preference for pre-testing some Hillary-esque concession? I doubt it.
-
It seems to me that Labour party supporters at PAS are building themselves a narrative to explain their parties upcoming annihilation and the Cosby/Textor revelations feed right into that, providing an excuse for the left that poor old Labour will only lose because of some sort of satanic, right-wing media sorcery.
I feel tarred by that Brush Danyl and I have to say I think your attempt at a meta-narrative is premature. I've lived through several Crosby/Textor campaigns and they do no one any good; they're divisive and cynical. Critiquing their approach to politics is not an attempt to distract attention away from Labour's problems, but a genuine comment on the trajectory of NZ politics. Perhaps you might limit your attempts at divination?
-
Touche Mr Ranapia.
-
Hadyn, well said.
I got up for the middle overs in which Vettori exacted precisely the kind of revenge I'm only capable of dreaming about! What a brilliant spell of bowling (mostly) ably backed up by his field.
-
vm said:
I'd be sure Labour's advisors are just as venal and evil and unscrupulous as Crosby/Textor, it's just that we don't know their names
Why? I can't recall anything Labour's done in NZ to rival what Crosby/Textor did/do in Australia; nothing at all.
To get all kiwiblog for a minute, why is Key using an Aussie strategist and whatever happened to poor old Bryan Sinclair?
-
But he's the leader - he shouldn't need "to be managed" because that just gives everyone that there's a bunch of backroom (dare I saw "hollow") men pulling the strungs
Helen received a fair bit of assistance from Brian Edwards and Judy Callingham (sp?) early in her term as leader. It's not unreasonable for Key to get assistance, it is silly, however, of him to pretend he's not.