Posts by Andrew E
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
It’s not gambling; it’s a stockmarket.
*Snorts his coffee*
-
While it is useful to have another forum in which to discuss the Labour leadership contest, I'm afraid the article preceding this discussion doesn't do the author much credit. Keith has built his reputation through well-researched and intelligent deconstruction of others' spinning. Unfortunately, this piece comes over as a piece of Farrar-esque spin. There's nothing wrong in writing a piece supporting your preferred leadership candidate, but why not just write something which honestly and openly espouses the virtues of the candidate, instead of this kind of pretty insubstantial innuendo?
I don't mean this to be taken as playing the person rather than the ball - like I said, Keith's writing is normally first class.
A more important question, to my mind, is how the Labour Party thinks it can address the problem of popular disengagement with politics, when it doesn't even give party members outside of the parliamentary caucus a vote in choosing the leader?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
My brother lives in the Epsom constituency and votes left, but held his nose and voted Goldsmith in the attempt to keep out Banks. After several years of seeing Banks in action as Auckland mayor, it is a bit surprising that other residents of the area that vote left didn't also hold their noses and vote right.
-
Not for the first time, ditto Lilith.
Perhaps Labour people could credit people voting Green because they want to see issues affecting the planet's viability addressed? Apart from some mumbling about the ETS, I really don't recall hearing much from Labour about those issues. They might start attracting people who (party voted) Green once they're credible on environmental issues.