Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

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

Forums › Politics › Jacinda Ardern - our new PM

1 | ... | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | ... | 268

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1964400 26-Feb-2018 12:56

Fred99:

If those are "lies", then they're in the same category as Key's "No GST Increase" lie etc. I don't like failed election pledges either, but unfortunately that's normal politics.

No - Jacinda is not in the same league as Trump for any "character" attributes, hence the amusing reference to her as "the anti-Trump".

So your argument is it's ok because the other party do it to? It's kind of a weak argument don't you think?

I would say Labour will be lucky to delivery 50% of it's promises. I don't think National would have failed to deliver on 50% of their promises.

networkn

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1964404 26-Feb-2018 13:01

Fred99:

networkn:

The problem I think I have, and others likely too, is your confrontational attitude when debating.

I'm sure exactly the same could be said about you.

Well, I disagree. I will try and provide some balance to my arguments where I think it's valid to do so. I am careful to avoid hurting peoples feelings, and when it's pointed out to me that I make a mistake in this regard, I'll address it.

I don't see much positive in this Labour Government so far. I disagree with most policies (or their implementation of them), and I have a problem with them overpromising and under delivering esp to the extent they have and likely will continue to do. I have however given credit where it's due (feel free to look back to check on that if you don't believe me), but for the most part I don't think Labour is likely to deliver on it's promises and those who voted Labour don't seem to give a toss or are blissfully ignorant.

If Labour had campaigned on what it will actually deliver, I'd be very surprised if they would be in power now.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1964412 26-Feb-2018 13:14

Fred99:
networkn:

Fred99:

He's a liar, a scummy misogynist, and a filthy dirty liar - well qualified in displaying all of those attributes long before he became POTUS.

And you're apparently criticising Jacinda by comparison for having not accrued a fortune?

"Sure she has become PM, but that kind of fell in her lap"?

Really? What an attitude! Sad!

Whilst not in the same league of Liar, so far Jacinda has repeatedly lied, by walking back policies either almost entirely, or significantly. Look at Kiwibuild, promised 100K of houses, NO chance of that. Promised 1B to healthcare, 500M Maybe is the reality. There are a lot of them.

If those are "lies", then they're in the same category as Key's "No GST Increase" lie etc. I don't like failed election pledges either, but unfortunately that's normal politics.

No - Jacinda is not in the same league as Trump for any "character" attributes, hence the amusing reference to her as "the anti-Trump".

Yep, I don't have any direct quotes of JK saying "no GST increases" but if he did then that was a lie.

Adern on the other hand, was campainging on a new era of transparency, honesty and all her other 'values'. To back-track on those values is worse than having never had them IMO.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1964413 26-Feb-2018 13:15

networkn:

Fred99:

If those are "lies", then they're in the same category as Key's "No GST Increase" lie etc. I don't like failed election pledges either, but unfortunately that's normal politics.

No - Jacinda is not in the same league as Trump for any "character" attributes, hence the amusing reference to her as "the anti-Trump".

So your argument is it's ok because the other party do it to? It's kind of a weak argument don't you think?

Oh dear.

I hope by putting question mark to that, you don't expect answers.

That's a great example of crooked thinking. Google the meaning of "I don't like" and "unfortunately", then try to explain how you'd come up with those questions.

networkn

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1964423 26-Feb-2018 13:37

Fred99:

Oh dear.

I hope by putting question mark to that, you don't expect answers.

That's a great example of crooked thinking. Google the meaning of "I don't like" and "unfortunately", then try to explain how you'd come up with those questions.

Another wonderful deflection by you.

Your defence of Labours lies seems to be "National lied as well, so it's ok"

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1964426 26-Feb-2018 13:52

networkn:

Another wonderful deflection by you.

Your defence of Labours lies seems to be "National lied as well, so it's ok"

That was not a deflection.

If that's truly what you think what I said "seems to be", then I suggest you need to calm down, re-read, reflect.

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1964430 26-Feb-2018 13:55

rjt123:
Yep, I don't have any direct quotes of JK saying "no GST increases" but if he did then that was a lie.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3311679/Key-no-GST-rise-video-emerges

The video link is not provided, but the substance of the article is sufficient.

JohnKey:

"National is not going to be raising GST. National wants to cut taxes not raise taxes.

Of course, what actually happened was an increase in GST alongside a cut in income taxes. The move was directly in contradiction to what was said (Note: this was not an election pledge or a campaign promise, this was a once-off statement made in a TV stand-up) but overall it was part of a revenue-neutral rebalancing of taxation income streams.

To equate that with backtracking on significant headline campaign promises is drawing a rather long bow.

EDIT: Video added and context clarified

https://youtu.be/E3-RYMwJiWA

Sharesies

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

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1964431 26-Feb-2018 13:56

Is your argument 'it's ok because the other party do it too?'

It is a weak argument.

It's a valid point so I've asked the question again. You can just answer "yes" or "no"

networkn

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1964432 26-Feb-2018 13:56

Fred99:

networkn:

Another wonderful deflection by you.

Your defence of Labours lies seems to be "National lied as well, so it's ok"

That was not a deflection.

If that's truly what you think what I said "seems to be", then I suggest you need to calm down, re-read, reflect.

I'm perfectly calm, and I stand by my assessment of your statement. You compared National and Labours broken election promises.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1964436 26-Feb-2018 14:00

6FIEND:
rjt123:
Yep, I don't have any direct quotes of JK saying "no GST increases" but if he did then that was a lie.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/3311679/Key-no-GST-rise-video-emerges

The video link is not provided, but the substance of the article is sufficient.

JohnKey:

"National is not going to be raising GST. National wants to cut taxes not raise taxes.

Of course, what actually happened was an increase in GST alongside a cut in income taxes. The move was directly in contradiction to what was said (Note: this was not an election pledge or a campaign promise, this was a once-off statement made to a single audience) but overall it was part of a revenue-neutral rebalancing of taxation income streams.

To equate that with backtracking on significant headline campaign promises is drawing a rather long bow.

Thanks, I can understand if people consider that JK misled the public.

Is it therefore ok for Jacinda to do the same, especially given she tried to paint a contrast between her values and the previous government's?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1964437 26-Feb-2018 14:01

rjt123: Is your argument 'it's ok because the other party do it too?'

It is a weak argument.

It's a valid point so I've asked the question again. You can just answer "yes" or "no"

No.

It's a very weak argument by a certain other poster to claim that I did, when I stated very clearly that I don't like it, and that "unfortunately that's normal politics".

networkn

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1964441 26-Feb-2018 14:11

Fred99:

rjt123: Is your argument 'it's ok because the other party do it too?'

It is a weak argument.

It's a valid point so I've asked the question again. You can just answer "yes" or "no"

No.

It's a very weak argument by a certain other poster to claim that I did, when I stated very clearly that I don't like it, and that "unfortunately that's normal politics".

You said you don't like it, and then justified it.

My criticism of Labour and JA is largely based on broken promises and having not properly planned her policies properly, so far you've done nothing to refute it, but you still accuse us of being biased.

If she had said during the election, look we don't have all the information we need to deliver policy, elect us and we will set up lots of committees and let you know how it's going to be next election, do you think she would be PM now?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1964447 26-Feb-2018 14:17

networkn:

Fred99:

It's a very weak argument by a certain other poster to claim that I did, when I stated very clearly that I don't like it, and that "unfortunately that's normal politics".

You said you don't like it, and then justified it.

I used the word "unfortunately" that's normal politics. Not in your wildest dream should that be construed to mean I "justify it".

You misrepresent me - and continue to do so without showing even the slightest sign that you comprehend.

That attitude actually bothers me more than politician lies, which I've come to expect.

I said this thread was an echo chamber. Boy was I right.

rjt123

517 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#1964448 26-Feb-2018 14:20

Fred99:
rjt123: Is your argument 'it's hiok because the other party do it too?'

It is a weak argument.

It's a valid point so I've asked the question again. You can just answer "yes" or "no"

No.

It's a very weak argument by a certain other poster to claim that I did, when I stated very clearly that I don't like it, and that "unfortunately that's normal politics".

Well it actually is normal politics, but Adern was campainging on a new brand of politics, an honest, transparent kind of politics. Which sounds great in theory, but she has failed to deliver.

You did seem to take umbrage however at Adern being labelled a liar, thus being put in the same basket as Trump. Which is a valid title given the difference between her campaign promises and her government's intentions (and most likely her government's results over the term). If she doesn't want to be likened to Trump maybe she shouldn't act like him.

networkn

Networkn
32353 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1964450 26-Feb-2018 14:22

Fred99:

I used the word "unfortunately" that's normal politics. Not in your wildest dream should that be construed to mean I "justify it".

You misrepresent me - and continue to do so without showing even the slightest sign that you comprehend.

That attitude actually bothers me more than politician lies, which I've come to expect.

I said this thread was an echo chamber. Boy was I right.

I am trying to keep an open mind here, if you can show me, perhaps another way what you mean, however, when you say Labour lied, it bothers me, but National did it, and it's normal politics, I can't see any other way to interpret what you are saying.

Is there any chance whatsoever you are wrong here?

1 | ... | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | ... | 268