Posts by Alex Coleman

  • Speaker: Britain: the crisis isn't…,

    The thing that continually strikes me about pieces like this is the lack of any self reflection whatsoever by the centrists, or whatever you want to call them.

    Complaining that Corbyn brought in outsiders so no fair, or doesn't count, or what have you are so far off point as to be funny if it weren't so frustrating. The fact is that the centrists suck much worse, and that's why they kept losing to Corbyn. There was no rule saying centrists couldn't sign up members, it's just that they have no idea about how to go about doing that.

    All they do is lecture the base that they, the wise and in touch, can connect with middle UK. But where is the evidence of that? If they could connect, they could inspire new members too. But they can't and so they play ridiculous games like the no confidence clsusterfuck after the referendum that led Corbyn to yet another win with the party. Did they not care about the rules of the fight they started? Did they not know them? Nope, they just assumed that everything would fall into their laps because they deserve it; because they just are better than the filthy mob that are keeping them from their rightful place. It's the same dynamic with which they treat the electorate at large.

    Sure, Corbyn sucks, but why can't they beat him given that? Oh that's right, blame the voters, coz it's never the very clever pol science grads fault at all. ever.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

  • Hard News: The long road to Hit and Run, in reply to BenWilson,

    Spot on Ben.

    there's a good post here, (by a US Army Staff Officer) decrying the growing trend in the US military to talk about 'warrior culture' and explaining why it pretty much sucks in every respect.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

  • Hard News: Public Address Word of the…,

    I think this will be bigger next year

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

  • Hard News: The fake news problem, in reply to ,

    The chances of his properties becoming targets is pretty high, I think anyone would say.

    What happens next though. Aside from his response, the wrapping up of the Trump brand with the Presidency will grow. Trump Towers and resorts will become symbols of the presidency. Freedom Towers, if you like. To stay in them will be patriotic, to shop in his stores will be a sign of defiance agin terrorism.

    If we thought the fetishising of flag lapel pins was weird, we aint seen nothing yet.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

  • Speaker: The Future,

    Events dear boy, etc.

    Coming up at some point soon, for example, is the whole water rights debate around Iwi and the Treaty and what 'ownership' means and how any such Iwi ownership will be recognised by the government, if at all.

    How ACT, Labour, National, NZF and the Maori Party choose to answer those questions will obviously affect many of these questions.

    Could be the Maori Party walks from the coalition. Could be Labour shoots its Maori voters in the back and itself in the foot. Could be the National supports its Maori party ally and ACT and National pick up votes from National's core. Could be something else.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

  • Polity: Key Derangement Syndrome…,

    "who couldn’t actually say what the TPPA was or why they were against it."

    That's nothing mate.

    When Clark was PM succesive National Party leaders were organising protests about the Foreshore and Seabed claiming Iwi were going to stop people having bbqs on the beach. What was that all about?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

  • Polity: Key Derangement Syndrome…,

    'We on the right have been observing "Key Derangement Syndrome" for years, and have been calling it by that name for almost as many years"

    Yeah, like much of the NZ online right's lines you lifted it straight from the GOP. Just be careful you don't trump yourselves. :)

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

  • OnPoint: Yeah nah, but what *do* we…, in reply to Joshua Arbury,

    Best outcome is that the current flag wins, but only just. Therefore the narrative can focus on there being a general appetite for changing the flag, but not to this design.
    This may mean I vote for the new flag. Even though I hate it.

    Worst outcome is that Starry Fern wins, but only just, on a turnout of under 70%. Be careful how you go :)

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

  • Polity: Poll Soup,

    I think there are a few groups of voters that Labour could think about

    1) NZF voters that want to change the government. Think of them as 'Labour leaning NZF', or "anti-National NZF' or whatever.

    2) National party voters who really don't like Winston Peters. There's a lot of them, and some aren't available to Labour, but I wonder how many of that shift from Lab --> National in 08 switched partly because Key ruled Winston out. The people who don't like Winston's race baiting and general antics.

    (The soft National party voters who think a NZF/Lab/Greens govt wouldn't be stable also fit in here somewhere. National hammers the left on this, it was their whole campaign last time aside from 'cuspy sepcial dotcom sux')

    3)The RW National Party voters who might vote for NZF but don't because they hate Labour/Greens and don't want to end up voting for that.

    So, burn down Winston's fence.

    Target his current voters (1) by telling them a vote for NZF is probably a vote for National. The more it gets said the more 1's might shift to Labour and 3's from National to NZF.

    If a NZF National govt starts to look likely, those 2's might shift.

    the centre isn't sitting there, you have to create one. The centre is just 'those voters who swung' and you have to give them reasons to swing. And not all of them about policy eh.

    Obviously you need an issue to get them moving, to make the distancing from NZF seem real enough to convince those voters that they will need to change their vote to get what they want. Look at what NZF and the right wing of National agree on, that the liberal Nat voters don't like. Iwi water rights are coming up and the Nat back bench is starting to squark.

    And Labour owes the Maori seats some love. Winston's fence delenda est.

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

  • Polity: A hazy, intriguing crystal ball,

    My position remains that Labour should burn down Winston's fence.

    Guessing what he'll do, trying to assign probabilities, maintain relations, and all that jazz is useless. I don't think even he knows what he will do until after the election. Until the election he will make that clear. This attracts voters from both 'sides', if you like.

    I suspect, and you'd know more than I, that a good chunk of his base don't like National, but don't want the Greens. Others don't really care between Lab and Nat and just like Winston.

    For voters who do have a pref between Lab and Nat, the risk of voting for Winston needs to be made explicit. Labour sidling up to NZF and playing nice diminishes that message and makes voting NZF seem safe for voters who don't like National. Make them choose between their dislike of the Greens and their dislike of National by saying a vote for NZF is probably a vote for National.

    That message, if sent strongly and consistently, should see (if I'm right) some small shift from NZF to LAB. And possibly a shift from NAT to NZF if they can be seen as a less risky vote for NATS. Which would be a nice dynamic to have.

    Winston's fence delenda est

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 247 posts Report

Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 25 Older→ First