What will happen to National now?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › What will happen to National now?

1 | ... | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | ... | 111

Networkn
32246 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2953053 10-Aug-2022 16:04

antonknee:

Yeah totally fair I probably am missing stuff - mainly because I wasn’t all that interested in politics before about 2017. And in fairness to me, National has dominated the headlines since 2017 with scandals.

It's pretty off-colour to criticize one 'team', suggesting they are worse, without reviewing the prior period thoroughly in my opinion.

Might want to look into the Labour camp sex scandal as one particularly bad example, and their handling of that (and the transparency that was promised and never delivered), and the fact that Kirton continued to have Jacinda's support throughout. He was moved to Air NZ (A company the NZ Government partially owns) and it was announced the same afternoon Jacinda Ardern went into labour (as a tiny byline).

You've barely scratched the surface and interestingly pretty much dismissed everything as irrelevant already. Perhaps review Labours period in opposition. It was pretty similar to that of National's period in opposition. Being in opposition is hard, and unpleasant.

ezbee

2372 posts

Uber Geek

#2953058 10-Aug-2022 16:20

Maybe the keenness to let certain candidates past is they come with 'benefits'
No matter the difficulties.
People vetting candidates must have been under some sort of pressure.

The leaked conversations in past election about which candidates come with more $$ backing and splitting donations.

It gave a peek into the distortions created by current campaign financing.
Reforms of party funding for elections, declarations would help all parties.

quickymart

13779 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2953059 10-Aug-2022 16:29

Re the vetting, I think it's extremely poor that both McClay and Goodfellow knew about all the accusations and (apparently) told Luxon's staff - but no one thought to tell Luxon. Why anyone would think that was somehow a good idea is beyond me.

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#2953068 10-Aug-2022 17:04

networkn:
It's pretty off-colour to criticize one 'team', suggesting they are worse, without reviewing the prior period thoroughly in my opinion.

Might want to look into the Labour camp sex scandal as one particularly bad example, and their handling of that (and the transparency that was promised and never delivered), and the fact that Kirton continued to have Jacinda's support throughout. He was moved to Air NZ (A company the NZ Government partially owns) and it was announced the same afternoon Jacinda Ardern went into labour (as a tiny byline).

You've barely scratched the surface and interestingly pretty much dismissed everything as irrelevant already. Perhaps review Labours period in opposition. It was pretty similar to that of National's period in opposition. Being in opposition is hard, and unpleasant.

Disagree. The comparison is directly between the National Party of the last five years and the Labour Party of the last five years. I’m certain you can go back through history since day dot and find examples of both parties behaving badly.

I think you’re getting in the weeds of conspiracy theory suggesting that Kirton is in Air NZ courtesy of the government, who then used a baby to cover it up. Let’s not forget that Kirton made clear his intention to stand down before that scandal even occurred. I do agree it wasn’t handled well and the public never got the transparency they deserve or were promised. I also think that that particular scandal is probably indicative there are/were other similar issues in Labour.

Also I got a little distracted seeing as my original point was about a perception that National plays dirtier than Labour, and all of the things we’ve discussed aren’t dirty politics so much as they are actual scandals.

Also Curran is the only Labour scandal I dismissed and I genuinely think that was blown out of proportion. I’d think that no matter which party it had been. If you read my post again, you’ll see I criticise Mallard, acknowledge the sex scandal as bad, and pointed out simply that Whatiri denies the allegations which are unproven. There are also National scandals I’d dismiss as irrelevant (like Muller’s MAGA hat, or Nick Smith getting yelly for example).

gzt

16997 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2953163 10-Aug-2022 18:44

Anyway back to the issues instead of the brand vs brand stuff. This latest stuff is a whole new thing:

TVNZ: Uffindell would trash the house after "excessive" use of alcohol and drugs, she said. "This was intimidation. This was bullying. I didn't feel safe," she said. The woman said she eventually moved out of the flat after having to lock herself in her bedroom to avoid a drunken outburst one night. "He was smashing on my door and yelling obscenities and basically telling me to get out - 'hit the road, fatty'.

Uffindell disagrees and says there was a falling-out between flatmates.

mattwnz

20107 posts

Uber Geek

#2953169 10-Aug-2022 19:07

Now we are getting victim shaming. IMO this is not good enough. It takes a lot for victims to come forward.

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mike-hosking-breakfast/opinion/mikes-minute-uffindell-saga-a-total-mess/

mattwnz

20107 posts

Uber Geek

#2953171 10-Aug-2022 19:11

alasta:

This really puts National in a difficult position.

The next election is shaping up to be a law & order election. National's "tough on crime" narrative is going to be a whole lot harder to sell with this scandal hanging over them. On the other hand, if they ditch him then they will get brutally punished in the by-election that will follow.

The big winner here could be Act. They put forward a strong candidate in the Tauranga by-election and a lot of National's voters would support him if another by-election were to be held.

I don't know if it will be a law an order one. I think it will be more of a economic and cost of living one, as well as a potential housing one. Although depends on how bad the brain drain gets. National probably wants it to be a law and order one though, because they want to show they are going to get tough and not waste tax payers money on young people on benefits, and they don't have any answers for the other things. They want to revert many of the tax changes around landlords and housing reverted back, as they are a homeowners and landlord party. We have seen clap downs on beneficiaries all before in the 90's, it doesn't work, and NZ already has almost zero real unemployment. .

Tradepub

Free professional, reference and technical white papers (affiliate link).

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#2953178 10-Aug-2022 19:19

mattwnz:
Now we are getting victim shaming. IMO this is not good enough. It takes a lot for victims to come forward.

https://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/mike-hosking-breakfast/opinion/mikes-minute-uffindell-saga-a-total-mess/

Of course Mike Hosking goes straight into bat for the blue team… if this was any other party, perhaps even Act, he wouldn’t be anywhere near as upset and would probably be denouncing the MP’s character and pointing out how this shows the MP couldn’t possibly be a “changed man” as claimed etc etc.

He’s conveniently missed the point that half the reason the justice system exists is so victims can get some revenge against their criminals. The concept of retribution and desert is a foundation of justice. So no, you don’t really need to question the victim on that. And in any case - victim shaming isn’t ok fullstop, regardless.

I can sort of see why Mike has an issue with this being brought up now. But he misses the point that it’s relevant now because a) Uffindell is now a public figure when he wasn’t before, and b) it’s similar in some ways to Uffindell’s other behaviour (shows a pattern and character).

ezbee

2372 posts

Uber Geek

#2953180 10-Aug-2022 19:25

So you know his background but go ahead and also keep your leader ignorant ?
Why go to such effort to take very big risks, surely there was someone amongst other 4 candidates ?

Not really any plan on mitigation when inevitable comes out.

Maybe ?
Candidates that come with money vs ones that come with only skills.
I note he was Vice President of Deutsche Bank in Singapore.
A branch of Trumps favorite lender with a lot of things swirling on their connections and processes ?

quickymart

13779 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2953185 10-Aug-2022 19:43

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/richard-prebble-christopher-luxons-report-card-and-why-the-election-is-his-to-lose/USVMBVBPTFNNFO3PNWC5LWMJC4/

Even just looking at the headline of this (paywalled) story, this didn't age well.

gzt

16997 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2953187 10-Aug-2022 19:46

alasta:The big winner here could be Act. They put forward a strong candidate in the Tauranga by-election and a lot of National's voters would support him if another by-election were to be held.

National won by a large margin. That electorate is very unlikely to pivot to ACT over this. Will they vote for a better National Party candidate? yes definitely.

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#2953191 10-Aug-2022 20:18

Excellent interview of Luxon by Guyon Espiner on RNZ I thought.

He’s got a point - National has a culture problem in that it’s no the individual person, but the type of person they’re attracting. Are bullies and criminals attracted to National for a particular reason? Or is National going after a “type” of person (who has these tendencies as a side effect, presuming they wouldn’t be thought desirable traits)? Why do they go on to select this type of person anyway?

It’s hard to ignore the pattern we’ve seen with Uffindell, Falloon, Walker, Bezzant, Barclay, Gilmore, Ross. “Arrogant, entitled men, with no sense of public duty” (Espiner).

Luxon should have just admitted that when it’s put that way it looks like there is a problem. Would be a smart political play to just take it on the chin and agree the candidates they’re attracting don’t live up to the party values, and then say you’ll go figure out why/how to fix it for the future - or if it’s fixed, say what you’ve done to fix it.

Except as Guyon Espiner says in the interview - Luxon hasn’t actually fixed the culture problem, because Uffindell was the first MP elected under his watch. So this one should reflect Luxon’s new direction, right?

RNZ - Morning Report - Christopher Luxon waiting for investigation results on Sam Uffindell

quickymart

13779 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2953204 10-Aug-2022 21:06

I thought because Peter Goodfellow also had a part in it, that he would be more "liable" (for want of a better word) with this selection than Luxon would be.

But as someone said earlier in the thread (networkn?), apparently the president of the party has 0 to do with candidate selection. Hell, Luxon seemed to find out at the same time as everyone else about this bloke's past - and while I would never vote National, I can't really fault Luxon for being unhappy given that he didn't even know about Uffindell's historic offenses.

Also: https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/08/controversy-surrounding-tauranga-mp-sam-uffindell-could-trigger-another-by-election-costing-taxpayers-1-2m.html <<< if this actually happens, I think National should fully foot 100% of the bill for it.

mattwnz

20107 posts

Uber Geek

#2953245 11-Aug-2022 00:48

antonknee:

RNZ - Morning Report - Christopher Luxon waiting for investigation results on Sam Uffindell

I have been pretty disappointed in him as leader overall and thought he would be far batter. I expected him to be as good as John Key. He sounded pretty shaky in this interview, esp when he said that National was a party of Law and Order. Yet look at their recent history. Too many double standards imo

antonknee

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#2953248 11-Aug-2022 01:13

mattwnz:
antonknee:

RNZ - Morning Report - Christopher Luxon waiting for investigation results on Sam Uffindell

I have been pretty disappointed in him as leader overall and thought he would be far batter. I expected him to be as good as John Key. He sounded pretty shaky in this interview, esp when he said that National was a party of Law and Order. Yet look at their recent history. Too many double standards imo

Yes. It’s the hypocrisy that really bothers me. Those in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones etc. they’re playing up “tough on crime” and “law and order” meanwhile constantly saying their own deserve a second (third, fourth, etc) chance. I note National voted against repealing the Three Strikes Act.

Then again that is consistent with Wilhoit’s Law: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

1 | ... | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | ... | 111