So it begins...

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

Forums › Politics › So it begins...

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 30

Awrrr
18657 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1958182 14-Feb-2018 17:47

networkn:

I see some very bad things in the words future, with a movement against established norms. It's "trendy" right now, but people don't understand the consequences.

Old can also mean ossified, stuck in your ways, afraid of change. I'm not saying that is the case with National, just pointing out that clinging to the status quo is not necessarily better than change for its sake.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1958183 14-Feb-2018 17:48

networkn:

I think you are seeing what you want to see. I see people stating what differentiates them from their competitor. You can have unity and conflict in the same area. It's about whether there is a shared vision, and I think that exists. From Debate comes new ideas, proper rationalization of plans, alternative viewpoints.

I think it's wrong, but it seems a lot of people just want change for the sake of it. I'd lay money on the table that says 1/4 of the people who voted Labour couldn't name 3 MP's or 3 policies. I recall Campbell live calling a "labour stronghold" and talking to two people there. Neither could name 3 of either of those two things. The Government was changed because it was perceived they had been in too long. Some voted "properly", by examining the policies and deciding they felt what was best for NZ was x or y.

It's disappointing to see people wanting younger, *just* because it's not the same old thing. Older generally means more experienced, steady, its' want I want in my policies and the people who make them. If you want to "shake things up" you do it one or two things at a time. New ideas, younger people, introduced gradually.

I see some very bad things in the words future, with a movement against established norms. It's "trendy" right now, but people don't understand the consequences.

No, Im not seeing what I want to see, I am merely a casual observer, and not biased. I am a swing voter, I swung for the reasons I have stated here many times. The vast majority of voters will never change their vote. Many have said or implied there here, its very obvious. One actually stated that here today.

When Bridges is chosen and when Paula B remains as deputy, the makeup of the National Party remains, aside from any that resign or are demoted. So the talent will generally still be there. But you have a fresh approach. Bridges is 41, held many senior portfolios, he is experienced. When we see these younger ones, yes, thats noted. Will the national policies have a huge revamp? No, that wont change. Will the public see a new and revitalised National party? yes, they will, even though at the core its the same, its a fresh beast. Too young is too young, and yes, JA is very much on the fringe there, but too old and to settled in their ways and do what we normally do is not what 2018 and beyond means. If you want National in power in 2020 its stocks just took a big jump upwards. It isnt actually shalom things up, its getting a fresher, more modern leadership, and leaving policies "unshaken" up.

It appears trendy, and thats happened in other elections, but Id suggest that younger ones these days are far more up with the play than their counterparts 50 years ago.Back then, no matter how great you were, you had to work your way up and be good, until you are "eligible" Its 2018 now, not 1960 or 1970

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1958184 14-Feb-2018 17:50

Rikkitic:

networkn:

I see some very bad things in the words future, with a movement against established norms. It's "trendy" right now, but people don't understand the consequences.

Old can also mean ossified, stuck in your ways, afraid of change. I'm not saying that is the case with National, just pointing out that clinging to the status quo is not necessarily better than change for its sake.

Exactly, and its not a policy change or revamp, its just adding some spark and life to the leaders that will manage the same policy structure.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1958197 14-Feb-2018 18:18

Crusher has stated that she is the only one that has any credibility with ethnic communities. And she loves a good fight.

However, get interview wants bad at all, its just these digs that bother me. When some of these jabs are basically putting down the others, thats not a great fight.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1958207 14-Feb-2018 18:49

networkn:......

I see some very bad things in the words future, with a movement against established norms. It's "trendy" right now, but people don't understand the consequences.

It seems somewhat arrogant to say that people don't understand the consequences.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1958288 14-Feb-2018 19:39

MikeB4:

networkn:......

I see some very bad things in the words future, with a movement against established norms. It's "trendy" right now, but people don't understand the consequences.

It seems somewhat arrogant to say that people don't understand the consequences.

Change is only good if it's good change.

The anti-establishment movement might or might not be a good thing. But its the underlying mentality behind it that is somewhat disconcerting.

In the circumstances I don't perceive that view as arrogant.

tdgeek

29740 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1958292 14-Feb-2018 19:54

rjt123:
MikeB4:

networkn:......

I see some very bad things in the words future, with a movement against established norms. It's "trendy" right now, but people don't understand the consequences.

It seems somewhat arrogant to say that people don't understand the consequences.

Change is only good if it's good change.

The anti-establishment movement might or might not be a good thing. But its the underlying mentality behind it that is somewhat disconcerting.

In the circumstances I don't perceive that view as arrogant.

The point that was made was a move from established norms. That doesn't mean that any change was anti-establishment. Anti-Establishment connotes a wild oppositional meaning, on the assumption that the established norms are good and normal. As we all should know, change is the new norm. Things dont sit stable and the same forever, much as they used to. The world is a changing place, lifestyles change rapidly. If we don't adapt, thats not great either

But I cannot see how that relates to a leadership change for National. This thread seems to tangent itself a lot

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#1958295 14-Feb-2018 20:04

@networkn:

I'd lay money on the table that says 1/4 of the people who voted Labour couldn't name 3 MP's ([removed]) or 3 policies.

Using "funny names" is a breach of FUG. You know that. Please don't do it again.

bmt

574 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1958328 14-Feb-2018 21:17

Bit strange how a sample size of two people can be extrapolated into a quarter of Labour's voters but hey, some people make up stats and think others will believe it for some reason :)

Collins just has way too much baggage to be elected to PM. She would not attract swing voters and there is a lot to attack her with (i.e her husband and his company's fishy dealings).

Amy Adams may be extremely competent but she doesn't have enough profile or personality. I know my politics, I watch and read the news daily and I barely know her above hearing her name semi-frequently.

Other wildcard contenders - seems unlikely, who else has the kind of background John Key had to come from zero political experience to leader of National in such a short period? Can't see it happening.

Really it's going to be Simon Bridges.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1958336 14-Feb-2018 21:32

freitasm:

@networkn:

I'd lay money on the table that says 1/4 of the people who voted Labour couldn't name 3 MP's ([removed]) or 3 policies.

Using "funny names" is a breach of FUG. You know that. Please don't do it again.

Sorry, I apologise. I actually thought a description was ok, but I have noted that for future reference.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1958361 14-Feb-2018 22:56

bmt:

Bit strange how a sample size of two people can be extrapolated into a quarter of Labour's voters but hey, some people make up stats and think others will believe it for some reason :)

Collins just has way too much baggage to be elected to PM. She would not attract swing voters and there is a lot to attack her with (i.e her husband and his company's fishy dealings).

Amy Adams may be extremely competent but she doesn't have enough profile or personality. I know my politics, I watch and read the news daily and I barely know her above hearing her name semi-frequently.

Other wildcard contenders - seems unlikely, who else has the kind of background John Key had to come from zero political experience to leader of National in such a short period? Can't see it happening.

Really it's going to be Simon Bridges.

@bmt It wasn't just two people I have spoken to who voted Labour who are like that, It was just two from an area in NZ that has *never* voted not Labour, I can't recall the region, but Campbell made a big deal of how staunch they were. My sister voted Labour and when I asked her why she shrugged, when I asked her about specific policies and whether she agreed with them, she didn't agree with them, said if she had known, she wouldn't have voted for them! I mentioned 3 other policies, and she proudly said she supported those fully. When I told her those were Nationals policies she wasn't too happy.

Whilst I understand everyone gets 1 vote, it's disturbing to me the number of people who vote for 1 person, no understanding of policies and then bitterly complain that the Government doesn't represent their views.

I understand perception is important, however, JC was cleared of wrongdoing by 2 (or three, I can't recall) investigations.

I'd agree on Amy Adams, I don't think I could tell you three things about her. Maybe that's a good thing LOL.

MikeAqua

7773 posts

Uber Geek

#1958560 15-Feb-2018 12:02

Having seen the 3 candidates speak on AM today ... Colins seemed clearly ahead to me.

Adams was very articulate and enthusiastic but didn't really say much of substance. Used a lot of slogans. She also sounds a bit posh which may put some people off.

Bridges spoke about his experience and (relative) youth but seemed a bit flat. There was nor real enthusiasm.

Collins talked about her being the only candidate with experience of being in opposition and knowing how difficult being opposition leader is. She was pretty clear that there needed to be a fight taken to the govt. She even slid in a small swipe at JA.

Both Bridges and Adams talked about more social liberality, Adams about more environmental focus.

Of the three IMO Colins seemed best suited to opposition leader, Bridges most prime ministerial. Adams most contrived.

Mike

elpenguino

3419 posts

Uber Geek

#1958579 15-Feb-2018 12:33

networkn:

bmt:

Collins just has way too much baggage to be elected to PM. She would not attract swing voters and there is a lot to attack her with (i.e her husband and his company's fishy dealings).

I understand perception is important, however, JC was cleared of wrongdoing by 2 (or three, I can't recall) investigations.

LOL - and who set up and controlled the investigations ? Her party mates.

Gee whiz, no wonder they never found anything ! It must be just coincidence she went to her husband's company presentations while on the taxpayer dollar !!

Most of the posters in this thread are just like chimpanzees on MDMA, full of feelings of bonhomie, joy, and optimism. Fred99 8/4/21

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1958582 15-Feb-2018 12:36

I think if JC could resolve the perception she is too aggressive, get lots of facts, and let the general public know how little of Labours promises they haven't, aren't going to, or can't keep, I am warming to her slightly. I didn't pay too much attention to her Husbands thing, but as I understand it, he was cleared of wrong doing too.

Amy Adams did a good job as Telecommunications Minister, I think she has done well with moving the UFB issues along. It will never be enough for some people, but those people almost without exception, don't understand the complexity. I don't "see" her as Prime Minister.

JC I can see as PM, but I see her like Helen Clarke (Who I despised more than any other human in NZ) and Shipley. Unapproachable, unrelatable, overly aggressive etc. I do think she has the capability of toning that down and leading effectively. I'd expect her to crush JA in the debates, but she needs to do so by being constructive and being able to argue the facts not just by being loud and aggressive.

SB will be PM material by 2020 I feel, but is a little unpolished. I don't mean slick, I just think he needs to work on his public speaking etc.

networkn

Networkn
32349 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1958587 15-Feb-2018 12:40

elpenguino:

networkn:

bmt:

Collins just has way too much baggage to be elected to PM. She would not attract swing voters and there is a lot to attack her with (i.e her husband and his company's fishy dealings).

I understand perception is important, however, JC was cleared of wrongdoing by 2 (or three, I can't recall) investigations.

LOL - and who set up and controlled the investigations ? Her party mates.

Gee whiz, no wonder they never found anything ! It must be just coincidence she went to her husband's company presentations while on the taxpayer dollar !!

Your mind sounds like it was made up well before the facts were in and nothing was going to dissuade you regardless. Who exactly are her mates that investigated? What was the actual link between the investigators and her?

I am not fully aware of the entire circumstances, but MP's are not required to work 24/7. If she went in her own time, then I don't see the issue. Sometimes I travel for work, when I am there, I might choose to take a movie in the middle of the day, if I have a large gap of time before another appointment, or have a lunch at a nice restaurant. Sometimes my wife might join me or I meet with friends in an area, might appear to some as not 100% right, but there is nothing nefarious in it.

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 30