Our PM Jacinda Ardern (and the government)

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 PM Jacinda Ardern (and the government)

1 | ... | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | ... | 118

1897 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1402

#3007162 8-Dec-2022 08:03

Leave Mahuta alone, she is doing a spectacular job electioneering for National....

Ardern really must be over a barrel by members of her own caucus who seem immune from consequences of their actions

marmel

1924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 226

ID Verified

Trusted

#3007166 8-Dec-2022 08:10

sen8or:
Leave Mahuta alone, she is doing a spectacular job electioneering for National....

Ardern really must be over a barrel by members of her own caucus who seem immune from consequences of their actions

Yeah she has been in the news a bit too much but I’m not really strongly one side or the other, I think Labour and National are often not that far apart on the political spectrum. I just happen to think this Labour government is turning out to be one of the worst ever and that isn’t good for anyone, regardless of who you normally vote for.

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#3007170 8-Dec-2022 08:21

marmel:

Yeah she has been in the news a bit too much but I’m not really strongly one side or the other, I think Labour and National are often not that far apart on the political spectrum. I just happen to think this Labour government is turning out to be one of the worst ever and that isn’t good for anyone, regardless of who you normally vote for.

You only have to look at the garbage dump that is National's transport policy (I don't think there is one, Light Rail would be gone and there wouldn't be an alternative that actually counts as rapid transit) and cities like Auckland with huge population growth would have even more people dumped into them without a plan to house or move them around the place.

Quite something to make that preferable to the huge mess of Light Rail that Labour have actually managed to create, but here we are.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#3007180 8-Dec-2022 09:13

GV27:

marmel:

Yeah she has been in the news a bit too much but I’m not really strongly one side or the other, I think Labour and National are often not that far apart on the political spectrum. I just happen to think this Labour government is turning out to be one of the worst ever and that isn’t good for anyone, regardless of who you normally vote for.

You only have to look at the garbage dump that is National's transport policy (I don't think there is one, Light Rail would be gone and there wouldn't be an alternative that actually counts as rapid transit) and cities like Auckland with huge population growth would have even more people dumped into them without a plan to house or move them around the place.

Quite something to make that preferable to the huge mess of Light Rail that Labour have actually managed to create, but here we are.

Neither side is interested in reality anymore.

All they care about is ideology, not matter how useless the ideas are.

If they did what was realistically needed, the gap between the parties would be so narrow a clear decision may be difficult.

So they let of ideology and tribalism for their hardcore followers and then its a contest to see who the can BS the most people into believing they have a plan.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#3007181 8-Dec-2022 09:17

marmel:

The reality is everything is based on estimates. James Shaw will be using the absolute worst stats he can find, as we know about half of our emissions are from agriculture, a good portion of the Green party are opposed to farming animals full stop, regardless of the climate impact. He never seems to mention that regardless of what we do in NZ it will have pretty much no impact whatsoever on climate change. Unless China, India and the US make massive changes which are likely to drastically alter their economies nothing will change.

Even if the global emission targets are met we still don't actually know if it will make much of a difference. Human history is simply a blink of the eye of earth's history, we simply don't have enough accurate records of climate modelling over several billion years to know just what is exactly happening with the temperature of the planet other than it is warming presently.

The worst thought of all though is that a government as completely ineffective as the present one has to try and navigate us through any climate change, we may as well all start building arks in the back yard now.

You could make a great anti-vaxer or sovereign citizen, that is exactly the same BS answers they give.

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3007182 8-Dec-2022 09:18

tdgeek:

But what I dislike is when two opposing posters banter away, and one, uses words like rude, etc etc etc, simply because the other disagreed. Passive/Agressive is not cool. Put your point across and debate it. Not referring to @Marmel, just saying. Is the Poltics thread about bitching or is it a discussion? To date its about bitching.

The irony in this is amazing.

'The poster' didn't call her rude because she disagreed, 'The poster" called her rude because of HOW she disagreed. Or in your mind characterising someones response as 'slathering' a suitable way to interact in your eyes?

Geekzone

Want to support Geekzone and browse the site without the ads? Subscribe to Geekzone now (monthly, annual and lifetime options).

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#3007183 8-Dec-2022 09:19

marmel: As someone has pointed out this isn’t the climate change thread so I won’t bother responding to any further comments, I’ve expressed my thoughts.

Bringing this back in track should the PM dump Mahuta from cabinet? On the one hand it could cause chaos if Mahuta has other strong supporters within the caucus but on the other it would show she is a strong leader, in control of the party and won’t stand for any BS.

Personally I just don’t think she has enough support to pull it off.

Climate change is VERY political.

marmel

1924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 226

ID Verified

Trusted

#3007185 8-Dec-2022 09:21

sir1963:

marmel: As someone has pointed out this isn’t the climate change thread so I won’t bother responding to any further comments, I’ve expressed my thoughts.

Bringing this back in track should the PM dump Mahuta from cabinet? On the one hand it could cause chaos if Mahuta has other strong supporters within the caucus but on the other it would show she is a strong leader, in control of the party and won’t stand for any BS.

Personally I just don’t think she has enough support to pull it off.

Climate change is VERY political.

True and I don't think it is helpful that it is but this thread is really about the PM & Labour, debating climate change is probably getting a bit off topic.

GV27

5978 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#3007192 8-Dec-2022 09:32

sir1963:

If they did what was realistically needed, the gap between the parties would be so narrow a clear decision may be difficult.

So they let of ideology and tribalism for their hardcore followers and then its a contest to see who the can BS the most people into believing they have a plan.

Agreed, basically a vote for those incapable of delivering solutions to problems vs. those who are incapable of understanding them.

marmel

1924 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 226

ID Verified

Trusted

#3007201 8-Dec-2022 09:46

GV27:

sir1963:

If they did what was realistically needed, the gap between the parties would be so narrow a clear decision may be difficult.

So they let of ideology and tribalism for their hardcore followers and then its a contest to see who the can BS the most people into believing they have a plan.

Agreed, basically a vote for those incapable of delivering solutions to problems vs. those who are incapable of understanding them.

Do you think we would ever see a centrist government made up of Labour & National in our lifetimes? If some of the minor parties made ground and got around 20% of the vote but their policies were so extreme (left or right) that they weren't palatable by either major party is it a possibility that Labour & National would form a coalition together? Ego's get in the way?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16319

Lifetime subscriber

#3007208 8-Dec-2022 10:00

networkn:

The irony in this is amazing.

'The poster' didn't call her rude because she disagreed, 'The poster" called her rude because of HOW she disagreed. Or in your mind characterising someones response as 'slathering' a suitable way to interact in your eyes?

You said:

Willie Jackson has apologised after being 'spoken to' by PM Jacinda Arden.
Arden confirms she still has confidence in her minister.
One wonders what one might need to do to cause JA to lose confidence in you?

I said:

Ask Iain Lees-Galloway or Meka Whaitiri.

Nothing rude there.

You said:

So if you physically confront/assault someone, or have sex with a co-worker, but not if you are incompetent? Not if you accuse someone of rape apparently and cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of dollars. For that you get a cushy job in Ireland :)

I said:

Ease up. You are slavering.

Not rude or insulting at all. Just an observation. Why did I make that observation? Because this is a tactic you (and others) frequently employ. You take one line of discussion, conflate it with something completely unrelated, then twist it to score a political point.

All I did was respond to your query by pointing to two ministers who had in fact been sacked by the PM. This as a response to your implied accusation (‘one wonders’) that she would never sack anyone for anything. It was a simple, objective, unemotional statement of fact. Nothing more or less.

You immediately followed up with a characteristic rant involving completely different people and situations to stick it to the government again. This was utterly gratuitous and had nothing to do with the previous discussion. It is just a ploy to keep hammering the government and shriek yet again how terrible it is. It may well be terrible. I am not arguing that. But you were foaming at the mouth and my description was accurate.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3007211 8-Dec-2022 10:04

networkn:

tdgeek:

But what I dislike is when two opposing posters banter away, and one, uses words like rude, etc etc etc, simply because the other disagreed. Passive/Agressive is not cool. Put your point across and debate it. Not referring to @Marmel, just saying. Is the Poltics thread about bitching or is it a discussion? To date its about bitching.

The irony in this is amazing.

'The poster' didn't call her rude because she disagreed, 'The poster" called her rude because of HOW she disagreed. Or in your mind characterising someones response as 'slathering' a suitable way to interact in your eyes?

I'm quite familiar how certain people post, you are over thinking it

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3007213 8-Dec-2022 10:14

networkn:

The irony in this is amazing.

Case in point. You have decided that your view is correct, and hence the irony is amazing. But your view is your opinion only

In any case I like you and her posts even if I don't always agree. As you say its HOW someone responded. But its also HOW someone percieved that response, maybe it hit a nerve, maybe the words were taken the wrong way if you looked at the context of the thread that led to the comment of interest. Maybe over thinking it. But its not easy with just words, if debaters here were in person, it would be no issue, im quite confident in saying that

sen8or

1897 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1402

#3007274 8-Dec-2022 10:49

marmel:

Do you think we would ever see a centrist government made up of Labour & National in our lifetimes? If some of the minor parties made ground and got around 20% of the vote but their policies were so extreme (left or right) that they weren't palatable by either major party is it a possibility that Labour & National would form a coalition together? Ego's get in the way?

I don't know about a labour/national coalition, can't see that happening, but if the greens were truly green, they should be able to form a coalition with either National or Labour, but they aren't, they are moving further away from their environmental stance towards socialism, so they risk getting the environmental policies pushed aside.

I can't see Act siding with Labour on too many policies as they are true to their origins, open market with minimal Govt intervention.

NZFirst have already proven to try and play with both National and Labour, neither partnership was successful. NZFirst in opposition is worthwhile, in Govt, not so much.

The Maori Party - they were obliterated first time round after siding with National, can't see them going back down that path (and I don't see them and Act playing nice in a 3 way coalition with National).

networkn

Networkn
32873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15475

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3007284 8-Dec-2022 11:18

tdgeek:

Case in point. You have decided that your view is correct, and hence the irony is amazing. But your view is your opinion only

In any case I like you and her posts even if I don't always agree. As you say its HOW someone responded. But its also HOW someone percieved that response, maybe it hit a nerve, maybe the words were taken the wrong way if you looked at the context of the thread that led to the comment of interest. Maybe over thinking it. But its not easy with just words, if debaters here were in person, it would be no issue, im quite confident in saying that

I was referring to the fact you made reference to passive/aggressive whilst being passive-aggressive, either intentionally or unintentionally.

I am confident if you asked 10 people if having something they said as being characterized as 'slavering' was insulting, 10 would say it was. It was rude.

I was not 'foaming at the mouth' nor 'slavering'. I was making the point that the examples given were for assault, and apparent breach of sexual misconduct, but what I perceive as performance issues from ministers on an ongoing basis goes unpunished.

Labour could be making more progress on it's policies if it had a greater number of competent ministers, but whilst incompetent ones are leading the charge, the opportunities for others to step up is lost.

Do you feel Mallard should have kept his job after incorrectly accusing someone of rape? Do you think Helen Clark, John Key or Luxon would have allowed him to stay?

1 | ... | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | ... | 118