J Adern, How will she affect the election, and is she a good leader?

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

Forums › Politics › J Adern, How will she affect the election, and is she a good leader?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 45

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1844823 10-Aug-2017 22:31

networkn:

Handle9:

networkn:

I see it partly as a power grab for him, he LOVES attention and those sort of people don't usually make good representatives. He's not particularly diplomatic which doesn't suit foreign affairs minister.

Winston has been foreign affairs minister before (2005-2008). By all accounts he was very effective. He was also effective as Treasurer and deputy Prime Minister until the coup by Shipley and subsequent changes in policy, destroyed the coalition of the late 90s. He has been effective in serving his constituency (Super Gold Card being his biggest example).

Just becasue he sees god in the mirror doesn't make him ineffective.

Well, it's kind of interesting because I don't really recall a single thing Winston did as foreign affairs minister, but to be fair I was somewhat younger and may not have been paying as much attention. I can't recall much other than the gold card thing he did good, and mostly I remember him by making promises he had *no* way of keeping to get into parliament and his outlandish and somewhat offensive behaviour over the years. I met him once and he made my skin crawl. His brother however, I got a great vibe from even though I didn't agree with much he said.

One of the things that happens when I meet politicians is that I get the impression many of them are slimey and dishonest. Not all, and some to some lesser degree. I haven't yet decided if politics draws slime, or makes slime or both.

I could possibly live with him as deputy PM under National, but I really struggle to see him being a team player for either major party.

I get that, I've met a few. You and I can talk frankly but they cannot. They oppose by default, so who has the best idea? No idea. They cannot agree with a super cool idea from another party. When you stop and think about it, its very bizarre that these people are tasked with running our country. many of us have been in management meetings. We all work together, but not in Govt

networkn

Networkn
32879 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15481

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1844827 10-Aug-2017 22:42

tdgeek:

Handle9:

networkn:

I see it partly as a power grab for him, he LOVES attention and those sort of people don't usually make good representatives. He's not particularly diplomatic which doesn't suit foreign affairs minister.

Winston has been foreign affairs minister before (2005-2008). By all accounts he was very effective. He was also effective as Treasurer and deputy Prime Minister until the coup by Shipley and subsequent changes in policy, destroyed the coalition of the late 90s. He has been effective in serving his constituency (Super Gold Card being his biggest example).

Just becasue he sees god in the mirror doesn't make him ineffective.

I agree. He is a mover and shaker and he's nit an a$$hole. This country needs movers not agreers that take 10 minutes to say nothing. JK BE, Little and so on and so on.

I really worry that all you want is change, any change. It reminds me a lot of American voters (No offense intended). Are they better off with their mover and shaker? (Who was VERY inexperienced just like JA). I bet a lot of them wish they had voted differently now.

I believe that JA may turn out to be a decent leader, but all she has proven right now is that she is a good talker. For me, Labour need to prove they haven't put lipstick on a pig, and in order to prove that to me, I'd like to see them in opposition making promises for more than 7 weeks during the lolly scramble. I'd like to see her hold her relentless positivity through 3 years and provide some quality opposition to National before I'd feel comfortable letting her take control. I think a well-formed opposition may get you a lot of the results you want. 2 Weeks ago I'd suggest you weren't even seriously considering Labour and other than a new leader they haven't proved anything, nor could they credibly in 7 weeks wipe away 9+ years of total wilderness wandering. I may be easy to be led to believe that JA is the Labour party, but that is no more true than Trump could turn the Republicans around. I don't agree with most of Labours ideals, but some aren't completely terrible. My overarching feeling is they aren't prepared or competant to take over right now. They might be heading in the right direction, but time would tell.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1844899 11-Aug-2017 08:15

networkn:

tdgeek:

Handle9:

networkn:

I see it partly as a power grab for him, he LOVES attention and those sort of people don't usually make good representatives. He's not particularly diplomatic which doesn't suit foreign affairs minister.

Winston has been foreign affairs minister before (2005-2008). By all accounts he was very effective. He was also effective as Treasurer and deputy Prime Minister until the coup by Shipley and subsequent changes in policy, destroyed the coalition of the late 90s. He has been effective in serving his constituency (Super Gold Card being his biggest example).

Just becasue he sees god in the mirror doesn't make him ineffective.

I agree. He is a mover and shaker and he's nit an a$$hole. This country needs movers not agreers that take 10 minutes to say nothing. JK BE, Little and so on and so on.

I really worry that all you want is change, any change. It reminds me a lot of American voters (No offense intended). Are they better off with their mover and shaker? (Who was VERY inexperienced just like JA). I bet a lot of them wish they had voted differently now.

I believe that JA may turn out to be a decent leader, but all she has proven right now is that she is a good talker. For me, Labour need to prove they haven't put lipstick on a pig, and in order to prove that to me, I'd like to see them in opposition making promises for more than 7 weeks during the lolly scramble. I'd like to see her hold her relentless positivity through 3 years and provide some quality opposition to National before I'd feel comfortable letting her take control. I think a well-formed opposition may get you a lot of the results you want. 2 Weeks ago I'd suggest you weren't even seriously considering Labour and other than a new leader they haven't proved anything, nor could they credibly in 7 weeks wipe away 9+ years of total wilderness wandering. I may be easy to be led to believe that JA is the Labour party, but that is no more true than Trump could turn the Republicans around. I don't agree with most of Labours ideals, but some aren't completely terrible. My overarching feeling is they aren't prepared or competant to take over right now. They might be heading in the right direction, but time would tell.

Very fair comments. No, I wasnt considering labour at all as they havent had a leader for god knows how long. Now they have, and unproven. But thats only part of my equation. I dont really care who wins. If national do, they will just let the market manage things, and defer health, roads and waterway issue, although its election year so we have a new motorway up there, tax cuts. Thats my beef. Govts in our small isle can really only manage internal issues, we cant do much globally to better our trade etc, but IMHO, Nats are not doing a lot here. We are well behind keeping roading up to date, now is a problem, housing crisis has been left to the market. So I feel a change may be good.The knowledge to run this country is held by the Govt departments, who the Govt gets info and advise from, that doesn't change. Perhaps a change to make things happen will work out well, although at a cost, as many years of cost savings by deferring infrastructure has to be met. Should Labs win, at worst they will not build many more houses, not upgrade many roads, not clean many waterways, not increase the ailing health budget, so thats no issue, thats where we are now. I think Nats need a leader, Bill is weak, a fill in.

SJB

2945 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#1845158 11-Aug-2017 13:26

It seems to me we are in a pretty enviable position in this country.

Most other countries voters seem to have a choice between a lousy party and and even lousier one. At least here IMO it doesn't really matter which party gets in to power, they tend to do a mostly acceptable job even if we disagree over the details.

I lean towards National but I really won't mind if Labour win now especially as the Greens won't be anywhere to be seen.

It might be good for National to lose. Mr Grey (aka Bill English) would be replaced and maybe losers like Nick Smith would be gone as well.

DaveB

1139 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 456
Inactive user

#1848880 19-Aug-2017 16:15

networkn:

For me, Labour need to prove they haven't put lipstick on a pig, and in order to prove that to me, I'd like to see them in opposition making promises for more than 7 weeks during the lolly scramble. I'd like to see her hold her relentless positivity through 3 years and provide some quality opposition to National before I'd feel comfortable letting her take control. I think a well-formed opposition may get you a lot of the results you want.

I could not agree more and I think she will be a good Opposition Party Leader, possibly leading a strong Labour party into power at the next round.

But if we shortly end up with a Labour led Coalition Government? I think that it's quite possible but I really worry that old Winnie would run rings around her.

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1848891 19-Aug-2017 16:58

Jacinda has NO experience at leading anything yet. She may be brilliant one day, but not yet. She comes across well on TV, but that isnt leadership.

Her being in charge is good for Labour, but they have not much substance behind them....I am NOT fan of Willie Jackson who is far worse than Winston, and only wants a free ride is something for nothing. Winston will be a power in the next government and will probably be good at whatever he gets due to his experience, but once again there is nothing behind him of substance.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19081 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16341

Lifetime subscriber

#1848892 19-Aug-2017 16:59

networkn:

I really worry that all you want is change, any change. It reminds me a lot of American voters (No offense intended). Are they better off with their mover and shaker? (Who was VERY inexperienced just like JA). I bet a lot of them wish they had voted differently now.

I believe that JA may turn out to be a decent leader, but all she has proven right now is that she is a good talker. For me, Labour need to prove they haven't put lipstick on a pig, and in order to prove that to me, I'd like to see them in opposition making promises for more than 7 weeks during the lolly scramble. I'd like to see her hold her relentless positivity through 3 years and provide some quality opposition to National before I'd feel comfortable letting her take control. I think a well-formed opposition may get you a lot of the results you want. 2 Weeks ago I'd suggest you weren't even seriously considering Labour and other than a new leader they haven't proved anything, nor could they credibly in 7 weeks wipe away 9+ years of total wilderness wandering. I may be easy to be led to believe that JA is the Labour party, but that is no more true than Trump could turn the Republicans around. I don't agree with most of Labours ideals, but some aren't completely terrible. My overarching feeling is they aren't prepared or competant to take over right now. They might be heading in the right direction, but time would tell.

I haven't decided yet if I want her as leader or not. I would rather not have boring Bill another time. There are things that need doing and his hands are so safe they are frozen. Unfortunately, there are not a lot of alternatives. I like your point about her being an effective force for change even in opposition, so I won't despair if National gets in, but I would really rather they don't.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1848931 19-Aug-2017 19:30

Pumpedd:

Jacinda has NO experience at leading anything yet. She may be brilliant one day, but not yet. She comes across well on TV, but that isnt leadership.

Her being in charge is good for Labour, but they have not much substance behind them....I am NOT fan of Willie Jackson who is far worse than Winston, and only wants a free ride is something for nothing. Winston will be a power in the next government and will probably be good at whatever he gets due to his experience, but once again there is nothing behind him of substance.

Neither did John. At least she's been in the Government system, he hadn't. You cant beat a good leader, they are born, not made. Thats where Bill E and the Labour wannabes failed.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1848934 19-Aug-2017 19:37

If she was an effective opposition leader, that ain't no change. This isn't the US, Its NZ, you have a mandate you do what you want, and the Opposition will oppose thats what they do, but they cannot make change.

I may probably vote National as is often the case, but what gets me is this election. Tax cuts which is not a National thing, election year. The road congestion has rotted, and lo and behold AKL has a new one and a good one, election year. Dunners is getting a new flash hospital. All good, although the health budget is in tatters

If I was the PM my role is to run this country, and Id be doing that every year, not leaving it till election year. Thats my beef. Do we run the country or do we manage our election? If you do the former, the latter looks after itself

networkn

Networkn
32879 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15481

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1849737 21-Aug-2017 11:37

tdgeek:

If she was an effective opposition leader, that ain't no change. This isn't the US, Its NZ, you have a mandate you do what you want, and the Opposition will oppose thats what they do, but they cannot make change.

I may probably vote National as is often the case, but what gets me is this election. Tax cuts which is not a National thing, election year. The road congestion has rotted, and lo and behold AKL has a new one and a good one, election year. Dunners is getting a new flash hospital. All good, although the health budget is in tatters

If I was the PM my role is to run this country, and Id be doing that every year, not leaving it till election year. Thats my beef. Do we run the country or do we manage our election? If you do the former, the latter looks after itself

TDGeek, it's easy to be critical if you don't take into account all the factors. You complain of a lot of things National hasn't done, and that they are bringing out the candy at Election time, but Labour hasn't had a good idea in 9 years+ and now with a new leader they are throwing candy around like it's the carnival time (Which it's fair to say is almost entirely funded by tax increases of one type of another). I don't think a new leader fixes all the issues they have, and for me to vote Labour they need to be able to sustain decent policies, show they understand what NZ wants, and can keep their stuff together for more than 6 weeks! You and I may be in the extremely fortunate situation we can afford additional taxes and may even not begrudge spending that extra money to provide, but not everyone can/would be.

National hasn't sat around for 9 years and done nothing. There are limited resources, the least of which is workers / qualified people to do things. You can't build roads or fix congestion without people and a lot of key people have been focused on areas that have needed urgent and immediate assistance like CHCH and Kaikoura. If you add 100,000 new houses, infrastructure is required, it takes time. They haven't been active enough in this area, but it's not like they haven't had their hands full of other things happening at the same time.

Imagine Labour in the state they were only 4 weeks ago with Andrew Little, trying to deal with another major natural disaster? The Labour party isn't just JA, there are a lot of issues deep in that party, and her leadership MIGHT fix it, but certainly not in quick order. Hence my call for her to sit in opposition for 3 years and show a stable leadership.

I disagree entirely that opposition cannot be effective in NZ. You simply need to come up with sensible ideas that appeal to the country. Well thought out housing policies with details as to how they will be funded and what else gets cut, and be coherant in your communication and the encumbant party will be forced to do the same or face dismissal at the following election.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1849747 21-Aug-2017 11:50

networkn:

tdgeek:

If she was an effective opposition leader, that ain't no change. This isn't the US, Its NZ, you have a mandate you do what you want, and the Opposition will oppose thats what they do, but they cannot make change.

I may probably vote National as is often the case, but what gets me is this election. Tax cuts which is not a National thing, election year. The road congestion has rotted, and lo and behold AKL has a new one and a good one, election year. Dunners is getting a new flash hospital. All good, although the health budget is in tatters

If I was the PM my role is to run this country, and Id be doing that every year, not leaving it till election year. Thats my beef. Do we run the country or do we manage our election? If you do the former, the latter looks after itself

TDGeek, it's easy to be critical if you don't take into account all the factors. You complain of a lot of things National hasn't done, and that they are bringing out the candy at Election time, but Labour hasn't had a good idea in 9 years+ and now with a new leader they are throwing candy around like it's the carnival time (Which it's fair to say is almost entirely funded by tax increases of one type of another). I don't think a new leader fixes all the issues they have, and for me to vote Labour they need to be able to sustain decent policies, show they understand what NZ wants, and can keep their stuff together for more than 6 weeks! You and I may be in the extremely fortunate situation we can afford additional taxes and may even not begrudge spending that extra money to provide, but not everyone can/would be.

National hasn't sat around for 9 years and done nothing. There are limited resources, the least of which is workers / qualified people to do things. You can't build roads or fix congestion without people and a lot of key people have been focused on areas that have needed urgent and immediate assistance like CHCH and Kaikoura. If you add 100,000 new houses, infrastructure is required, it takes time. They haven't been active enough in this area, but it's not like they haven't had their hands full of other things happening at the same time.

Imagine Labour in the state they were only 4 weeks ago with Andrew Little, trying to deal with another major natural disaster? The Labour party isn't just JA, there are a lot of issues deep in that party, and her leadership MIGHT fix it, but certainly not in quick order. Hence my call for her to sit in opposition for 3 years and show a stable leadership.

I disagree entirely that opposition cannot be effective in NZ. You simply need to come up with sensible ideas that appeal to the country. Well thought out housing policies with details as to how they will be funded and what else gets cut, and be coherant in your communication and the encumbant party will be forced to do the same or face dismissal at the following election.

It has been a common theme that National have left housing, roading and health to rot. Its easier to have a nice a set of books when spending is deferred. As for Labour, they have been leaderless. Yes, it does come down now to whether this invigouration has any backbone. Had Labour said we will build a 1.4 Bill hospital, and spend 10.4 billion on roading, I am sure it will have been met with "here we go again, Labour gets the chequebook out", more deficit. Yet thats what we have. And IMHO, there is very little lattitude for a party to change their policy to that proposed by the Opposition. The books are or have been opened, that will allow Labour to set their baseline, debates coming up, time to get it all on the table and more importantly how funding will occur.

Easy for me to say as I am a swing voter, its very hard for most voters to swing, I expect the majority never have, although the younger generation are probably more flexible

In short, its now the official silly season!

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Wiggum

1199 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 472
Inactive user

#1849761 21-Aug-2017 12:18

tdgeek:

It has been a common theme that National have left housing, roading and health to rot.

Thats a very naive statement to make.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1849776 21-Aug-2017 12:45

Wiggum:

tdgeek:

It has been a common theme that National have left housing, roading and health to rot.

Thats a very naive statement to make.

Oh dear, is it only me that says that? You should perhaps read the news more

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 589
Inactive user

#1849863 21-Aug-2017 15:21

tdgeek:

Pumpedd:

Jacinda has NO experience at leading anything yet. <snip>

Neither did John. At least she's been in the Government system, he hadn't. <snip>

No experience except winning his electorate seat in a General Election three times before being made PM. (Something that Ms. Adern has not once managed to achieve)

...oh, that and the two years spent as the Opposition's Spokeperson for Finance before being promoted to Opposition leader where he spend a further two years developing the National party into an entity that could beat Helen Clark's Labour Government and sustain level of support from voters that has never been achieved in any MMP framework ever.

Yeah - that's roughly about the same as Labour's spokesperson for Children who was left holding the parcel when the music stopped 8wks out from the Election.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1849869 21-Aug-2017 15:27

6FIEND:

tdgeek:

Pumpedd:

Jacinda has NO experience at leading anything yet. <snip>

Neither did John. At least she's been in the Government system, he hadn't. <snip>

No experience except winning his electorate seat in a General Election three times before being made PM. (Something that Ms. Adern has not once managed to achieve)

...oh, that and the two years spent as the Opposition's Spokeperson for Finance before being promoted to Opposition leader where he spend a further two years developing the National party into an entity that could beat Helen Clark's Labour Government and sustain level of support from voters that has never been achieved in any MMP framework ever.

Yeah - that's roughly about the same as Labour's spokesperson for Children who was left holding the parcel when the music stopped 8wks out from the Election.

National has always been the dominating party, thats a huge help. Its won more elections than Labour by a wide margin. Labour under Clarke had got very tired. Its hardly a fair comparison.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | 45