Our next national election - policies, promises and people

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

Forums › Politics › Our next national election - policies, promises and people

1 | ... | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | ... | 33

473 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2411775 3-Feb-2020 08:48

tdgeek:

Mahon:

Being in government with Winston is like selling your soul to the devil. Opposition would be more attractive than working with Winston.

Thats a blind comment. Whether you know about it, NZF has a following. The trick is to garner that following (to help you govern, which is the KEY issue) but not becoming beholding to them. So, your position puts you on the back foot. NZF played the game, that game wont rinse and repeat. So Bridges has outwardly declined NZF. That means that Peters WILL go with Labour, and WONT get a kingmaker set of demands. Bridges has therefore rolled over amp helped Labour reduce the NZF demands. Silly.

In my opinion, Winston is a trickster and a gangster. I wouldnt trust him to help my grandmother across the street. Its time he retired. In return for billions of taxpayers dollars last election he allowed Labour to buy power, all while he was secretly readying to sue some of his colleagues over his super overpayment. That cost taxpayers millions and exonerated everyone. Whover wins this election would be way better off to forget Winston, and National has allowed that to happen.

tdgeek

29749 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2411776 3-Feb-2020 08:52

GV27:

tdgeek:

You call that spine? Work with David Seymour???? Ok. Spine would be working with NZF but NOT caving into them.

This was inevitable after the last election.

Whether you agree with it or not, Bridges has at least come out and made a definitive call on something. The bar is very low in that regard for him but none the less.

This is pertinent https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/119216986/simon-bridges-chooses-scorched-earth-approach-that-will-be-the-end-of-him-or-winston-peters

It seems that Bridges/National want to govern alone. Rather be in Opposition than not govern alone. If they want to do the best for NZ they should want to govern, and a coalition should allow that, albeit by tempering radical changes. Given that NZF is National biased, Bridges is cutting off his nose to spite his face bu chutting that door, IMHO. Last election they negotiated, now they won't. It seems more emotive than decisive to me.

tdgeek

29749 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2411789 3-Feb-2020 08:58

Mahon:

In my opinion, Winston is a trickster and a gangster. I wouldnt trust him to help my grandmother across the street. Its time he retired. In return for billions of taxpayers dollars last election he allowed Labour to buy power, all while he was secretly readying to sue some of his colleagues over his super overpayment. That cost taxpayers millions and exonerated everyone. Whover wins this election would be way better off to forget Winston, and National has allowed that to happen.

Thats over emotive. NZF will poll around 7%, thats the issue. Thats what a party wants onside. They can negotiate the clean slate, and decide form there, and if thats "no Winston", thats fine. But to throw the toys out months ahead of an election is silly. He can be a ratbag, so what? The rest of the time he's doing what most MPs should be doing, their best for NZ. Even if you don't agree with him.

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2411809 3-Feb-2020 10:12

tdgeek:

Given that NZF is National biased

Are you sure about that? Because last time I checked, Winston was negotiating with National, as Bridges says, under the pretense of good faith but was also gearing up to sue senior National MPs and staffers. Despite NZ First members preferring a deal with National, he chose Labour. Not the actions of someone who is apparently predisposed to siding with National.

I fail to see how this is Bridges rashly burning bridges and not an entirely foreseeable consequence of Winston's behavior pre- and post 2017 elections. What did he expect was going to happen next time around?

tdgeek

29749 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2411818 3-Feb-2020 10:25

GV27:

tdgeek:

Given that NZF is National biased

Are you sure about that? Because last time I checked, Winston was negotiating with National, as Bridges says, under the pretense of good faith but was also gearing up to sue senior National MPs and staffers. Despite NZ First members preferring a deal with National, he chose Labour. Not the actions of someone who is apparently predisposed to siding with National.

I fail to see how this is Bridges rashly burning bridges and not an entirely foreseeable consequence of Winston's behavior pre- and post 2017 elections. What did he expect was going to happen next time around?

What I bolded

You're making Peters sound like a circus that erupts three times a week. Rashly burning Bridges is 100% emotive from Bridges. The smart man would button it, see what happens. Negotiate with NZF if it comes to that then walk away. But instead of giving Nats any available chance to re govern, and representing the 100,000's of National voters, he doesnt Like Peters so he drops it for everyone, pretty immature if you ask me. Nothing to lose by being the smart man. Conversely, maybe he is the smart man, he feels NZF voters will dump NZF and go with National. But that's a gamble

tdgeek

29749 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2411822 3-Feb-2020 10:27

Or perahs he knows he will be rolled, so this bold move is his last attempt to hang on as leader.

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2411827 3-Feb-2020 10:34

tdgeek:

Or perahs he knows he will be rolled, so this bold move is his last attempt to hang on as leader.

Or he knows the best way to power is deprive Labour of coalition partners, given National has literally one guy to fall back on. Winston has blustered his way through every election by refusing to say who he'd work with and made himself relevant in the process. Now he's isolated and can't play everyone for fools.

It's divide and conquer, plain and simple. Now NZ First voters only have one coalition option. If that involves working with the Greens, I'd wager a fair few of them will consider voting for National instead.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

tdgeek

29749 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2411849 3-Feb-2020 10:57

GV27:

tdgeek:

Or perahs he knows he will be rolled, so this bold move is his last attempt to hang on as leader.

Or he knows the best way to power is deprive Labour of coalition partners, given National has literally one guy to fall back on. Winston has blustered his way through every election by refusing to say who he'd work with and made himself relevant in the process. Now he's isolated and can't play everyone for fools.

It's divide and conquer, plain and simple. Now NZ First voters only have one coalition option. If that involves working with the Greens, I'd wager a fair few of them will consider voting for National instead.

Could be, as per that article it will destroy one or the other. If NZF voters decide to play safe with National instead of NZF, goodbye NZF. Or some vote NZF to ensure Labour has a leash if the likelihood is a Labour/Greens win.

All up in the air, which is why I find Bridges "NO" to be short sighted. He has removed some options. he can say NO anytime

elpenguino

3424 posts

Uber Geek

#2411874 3-Feb-2020 12:27

Mahon:

tdgeek:

Mahon:

Being in government with Winston is like selling your soul to the devil. Opposition would be more attractive than working with Winston.

Thats a blind comment. Whether you know about it, NZF has a following. The trick is to garner that following (to help you govern, which is the KEY issue) but not becoming beholding to them. So, your position puts you on the back foot. NZF played the game, that game wont rinse and repeat. So Bridges has outwardly declined NZF. That means that Peters WILL go with Labour, and WONT get a kingmaker set of demands. Bridges has therefore rolled over amp helped Labour reduce the NZF demands. Silly.

In my opinion, Winston is a trickster and a gangster. I wouldnt trust him to help my grandmother across the street. Its time he retired. In return for billions of taxpayers dollars last election he allowed Labour to buy power, all while he was secretly readying to sue some of his colleagues over his super overpayment. That cost taxpayers millions and exonerated everyone. Whover wins this election would be way better off to forget Winston, and National has allowed that to happen.

National didn't mind trusting NZF in 1996, I'm sure they'll consider NZF in their options in the future.

Saying Labour bought power ? If you want to have a rant, fine. If you want to have a more objective unbiased discussion maybe tone it down a bit. For example, you may have forgotten that national's Key government approved the Maori party's whanau ora policy ?? Who's buying power now?

In fact it's not really buying power is it? It's making policy concessions to a coalition partner, for public money to be spent on projects for the public good. That's the reality of coalition governments and it doesn't just happen in NZ.

Do you have special powers to predict the future? I googled and I couldn't find a story on the decision from the Peters privacy case - Radio NZ said the decision is pending . Let's not make stuff up.

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

elpenguino

3424 posts

Uber Geek

#2411879 3-Feb-2020 12:46

tdgeek:

GV27:

tdgeek:

Or perahs he knows he will be rolled, so this bold move is his last attempt to hang on as leader.

Or he knows the best way to power is deprive Labour of coalition partners, given National has literally one guy to fall back on. Winston has blustered his way through every election by refusing to say who he'd work with and made himself relevant in the process. Now he's isolated and can't play everyone for fools.

It's divide and conquer, plain and simple. Now NZ First voters only have one coalition option. If that involves working with the Greens, I'd wager a fair few of them will consider voting for National instead.

Could be, as per that article it will destroy one or the other. If NZF voters decide to play safe with National instead of NZF, goodbye NZF. Or some vote NZF to ensure Labour has a leash if the likelihood is a Labour/Greens win.

It depends on the split though. If National think they'll pull 80% of the voters by such a move it makes sense, and I'm sure such polling has been done since elections are so data driven these days.

Speaking of pulling voters from another party, remember the stated support on these fora for a 'blue-green' party to pull voters away from the Greens to a more National-friendly 'eco party'? Research from Vic uni discovered that such a party would appeal to a 'tiny' proportion of green voters. https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/110207099/teal-vote-within-green-party-minuscule-data-suggests

According to political scientist Jack Vowles the Environment party is more likely to draw support away from National instead. OTOH if a new eco party weakens the greens below 5% thats not good for labour. No party has ruled alone under MMP so partners are vital. Governing with National was toxic for the Maori party and United Future and if National can't find partners they'll try to weaken any that might govern with Labour.

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

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18663 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2415571 10-Feb-2020 14:09

From RNZ:

The Electoral Commission has referred donations made to New Zealand First Foundation to the police for investigation.

In a statement, the commission said it had made inquiries into issues raised regarding New Zealand First Party and the New Zealand First Foundation and compliance with the requirements for donations and loans.
"Based on the information available, we have formed the view that the New Zealand First Foundation has received donations which should have been treated as party donations for the New Zealand First Party. In the Commission's view, the donations were not properly transmitted to the Party and not disclosed as required by the Electoral Act 1993," the commission said.

"The Commission does not have the investigative powers to form a view about whether this failure to transmit and the non-disclosure means offences have been committed. These matters have therefore been referred to the New Zealand Police, which have the necessary powers to investigate the knowledge and intent of those involved in fundraising, donating, and reporting donations."

The Electoral Commission said it would not be commenting further as the matter for now would be one for police.

Edit: Now there is a banner saying the police have passed it on to the serious fraud office.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

tdgeek

29749 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2415572 10-Feb-2020 14:16

elpenguino:

It depends on the split though. If National think they'll pull 80% of the voters by such a move it makes sense, and I'm sure such polling has been done since elections are so data driven these days.

Speaking of pulling voters from another party, remember the stated support on these fora for a 'blue-green' party to pull voters away from the Greens to a more National-friendly 'eco party'? Research from Vic uni discovered that such a party would appeal to a 'tiny' proportion of green voters. https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/110207099/teal-vote-within-green-party-minuscule-data-suggests

According to political scientist Jack Vowles the Environment party is more likely to draw support away from National instead. OTOH if a new eco party weakens the greens below 5% thats not good for labour. No party has ruled alone under MMP so partners are vital. Governing with National was toxic for the Maori party and United Future and if National can't find partners they'll try to weaken any that might govern with Labour.

Yes, it depends on the split. Polls are notoriously variable, its a gamble

Teal party never ever. National is not green, at all. Never happen

GV27

5897 posts

Uber Geek

#2415591 10-Feb-2020 15:10

Rikkitic:

The Electoral Commission said it would not be commenting further as the matter for now would be one for police.

Edit: Now there is a banner saying the police have passed it on to the serious fraud office.

Given Winston's frothing about National being under SFO investigation, this ironing is delicious. Only last night he was saying he was going to be referring privacy breaches to the police.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18663 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2416300 11-Feb-2020 17:26

I wouldn't quite want to call them rats, but a number of scurrying mammals are in the process of departing the sinking vessel sometimes referred to as the National Party. Simon Bridges is trying to put a brave face on it (what else can he do?) but his comments sound very defensive. I think we can look forward to three more years of Labour-led government.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Handle9

11391 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2416303 11-Feb-2020 17:35

Rikkitic:
I wouldn't quite want to call them rats, but a number of scurrying mammals are in the process of departing the sinking vessel sometimes referred to as the National Party. Simon Bridges is trying to put a brave face on it (what else can he do?) but his comments sound very defensive. I think we can look forward to three more years of Labour-led government.

Wagner and Carter were both older MPs. Dowies damaged goods after the Jamie Lee Ross stuff. None of them were particularly likely to play a significant role if National were successful so it's just as likely that they were "encouraged" to move on.

1 | ... | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | ... | 33