Posts by uroskin
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
But I did feel a wee bit squeamish at Margaret Mutu seeming to state belief as empirical fact.
I trust Prof Mutu knows empirically that 80% of a whale's sperm doesn't get into his girlfriend and that's why the sea tastes salty. (Thank you, Jack Dee)
-
It's what you identify with
I'm a Belgian-New Zealander (origin-nationality). Soon my origins won't exist anymore (we haven't had a government for a while now) so I'll become a Flemish-New Zealander. Good thing I'm not from Old Zeeland then!
They might have to rebrand the Belgian cafes too. Just keep drinking our beer.The identification thing is interesting in the sexual orientation studies debate: are you straight because you identify as such or because you only commit heterosexual acts? The disconnect between the two I meet regularly at gay saunas.
-
Interesting that Spartacus is looking for a Caucasian male
. I might apply cos I bet I give better blowjobs to Crixus than Juicy Lucy.
-
You sure that wasn't Ms Bennett?
I will beat you to death with my spare copy of Pride and Prejudice, just you see if I don't. Thou shalt not take the name of Jane in vain.
I actually meant Paula Bennett.
-
To paraphrase Mr. Bennett, I'll get over it sooner than I deserve.
You sure that wasn't Ms Bennett?
-
What a truly proportional parliament would have looked like in 2008 (no electorate seats, 0.8% threshold):
National: 44.93% = 53.92 seats = 54 (-4)
Labour: 33.99% = 40.80 seats = 41 (-2)
Green: 6.72% = 8.06 seats = 8 (-1)
NZ First: 4.07% = 4.88 seats = 5 (+5)
ACT: 3.65% = 4.38 seats = 4 (-1)
Maori Party: 2.39% = 2.87 seats = 3 (-2)
Progressive: 0.91% = 1.09 seats = 1 (-)
United Future: 0.87% = 1.04 seats = 1 (-)A "Maniact" Government would still have been a possible outcome.
-
It's akin to the idea that voting for anyone but National or ACT was pointless in the last election because they won, so everyone else got no power.
We don't vote for power but for representation. In the current MMP system with Maori seats and thresholds, the representation is distorted by electorate seats, their possible overhang and the coat tail MPs who get in because one portion of their electorate is so concentrated or gerrymandered their vote is worth far more than a party that gets 4.5% but spread nationally.
Any review of MMP should make it more proportional by ridding us of Maori and general seats. -
Another way of looking at it is (at the 2008 election): a vote for NZF was worth nothing (despite being over 4% of the party vote) while a 2% Maori Party vote got them to overhang/hang over the parliament.
- Does that mean Maori voters are worth infinitely more than NZFP ones?
- Should Winston Peters campaign in Maori electorates only since that would have yielded seats instead of wilderness? -
My disappointment with the upcoming MMP referendum is that there won't be a *more* proportionate system on the ballot: 120 list seats, 0.8% threshold, candidate preferences within lists optional, no separate Maori seats. I hope MMP wins and then have a review along those lines.
-
Here on Waiheke Island the elections are always a lively affair and we have consistently better turnouts than other areas in Auckland. Yup, 17 candidates for 5 seats. You can see, hear and ask them all here.
Plenty of candidate meetings, including speed dating. Some have been standing since Waiheke was connected to the mainland during the last ice age and still haven't gotten in. But it's all in good fun, apart from some long standing grudges between candidates (which, I fear, may end up in a dysfunctional board if they all get elected) and aggressive heckling during the tea and scones session at Grey Power.Disclosure: my partner is standing too.