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 | 11 | 12 | ... | 45

Awrrr
18612 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1851111 23-Aug-2017 11:21

networkn:

I care that 6 months ago she categorically stated she did not want the PM job under any circumstances.

Horrors! A politician who changes her mind! How can that be? Good thing we have National steaming towards the rocks. Steady hands there. They will never alter course to accommodate changed circumstances.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32260 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1851125 23-Aug-2017 11:26

Rikkitic:

networkn:

I care that 6 months ago she categorically stated she did not want the PM job under any circumstances.

Horrors! A politician who changes her mind! How can that be? Good thing we have National steaming towards the rocks. Steady hands there. They will never alter course to accommodate changed circumstances.

Toward what rocks!? They have altered course as required. Just because they don't do it to a time table you approve of, or in the exact way you see fit, doesn't mean they aren't adjusting.

I apologise if I am incorrect, but I think I saw in a previous post or two you are approaching retirement age. Have you had a look at what Labour intends for pensions?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18612 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1851145 23-Aug-2017 11:45

I am already well past retirement age and enjoying my pension, thank you very much.

Like many people, so far I like Jacinda Ardern. I find her a breath of fresh air. But I am not a Labour supporter and never have been. Anything is possible, especially in this election, but I doubt I will vote for them. I am having a hard time deciding to vote for anyone.

Your posts indicate that you place substance over style in politics, yet you call Andrew angry and Jacinda shrill. I don't agree, especially with the latter, but even if this is true, it is about presentation not policy. It shouldn't matter to you.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

networkn

Networkn
32260 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1851174 23-Aug-2017 12:02

Rikkitic:

I am already well past retirement age and enjoying my pension, thank you very much.

Like many people, so far I like Jacinda Ardern. I find her a breath of fresh air. But I am not a Labour supporter and never have been. Anything is possible, especially in this election, but I doubt I will vote for them. I am having a hard time deciding to vote for anyone.

Your posts indicate that you place substance over style in politics, yet you call Andrew angry and Jacinda shrill. I don't agree, especially with the latter, but even if this is true, it is about presentation not policy. It shouldn't matter to you.

I do place more on policy than style, but I also have to watch whoever is in charge, for the next 3 years, and I also take into account how that person may be perceived by other international leaders. John Key and Bill English is/was well liked and respected in the International community, Donald Trump is not. DT's personality and style of communication has had a negative effect on the way other countries treat and interact with the US, and I expect the ramifications to be longer lasting than his presidency. JA and Labour have already rubbed Australia the wrong way, right or wrongly.

I do not dislike JA completely, I just think she is not ready for PM *yet* and I'd be interested to see how she copes with the pressure of opposition for longer than 6 weeks. I am also very interested to see, if Labour are not elected, if they are more unified. I have no faith in that right now, I think what you are seeing is very different from what's going on behind closed doors.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1851179 23-Aug-2017 12:05

I am keeping my mind open, I will probably make my decision on the eve of the election. Either way I believe that this election is an interim one and we will be going to the polls again with 18 months.

tdgeek

29671 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1851185 23-Aug-2017 12:08

networkn:

jonathan18:

Labour were in power for nine years, and the general consensus is they did a pretty good job with the country's finances; while those individuals responsible for this may no longer be there, it's not like they've simply abandoned the same relatively safe (and economically conservative - let's be honest, it's not like the Clarke government did a 180 on the post-1984 neo-right orthodoxy) approach.

I'm not a Labour Party stooge - in fact, I've never (yet) voted for them - but I give them a little more credit in terms of their fiscal management skills than others here clearly do. Indeed I start from the reasoned assumption they can be trusted to not financially mismanage this country, and focus on which party's policies I believe will be best for NZ's future.

Labour did "well" for NZ financially largely of Clarkes own admission that world wide pretty much everyone else was too. They had no huge challenges in their time in office that I can recall that put NZ under big financial or resource strain.

Its the same now. GFC was 2008, we were far less affected than other countries that were very intermingles in global banking.EQ had billions already collected under the EQ levy. Inflation has been low, trade has been fine, oil has trended down, all of these factors we cannot control. Not a lot different. Same with any NZ Govt in good or bad global times, no choice but to ride with it, so we look at home. Issues have ben left and left, now we have all these policies. If nothing else, Ahern has forced National to get up and start fixing whats been left unattended here

tdgeek

29671 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1851188 23-Aug-2017 12:14

MikeB4:

I am keeping my mind open, I will probably make my decision on the eve of the election. Either way I believe that this election is an interim one and we will be going to the polls again with 18 months.

Maybe. End of the day both parties are central, Peters will be in Govt. Inflation is low, things are steady here, that will continue no matter who gets in. There does need to be big spending going on so the books wont look as good as they have been lead to have been, deferring spending. But that adds employment, people will like the builds going on transport wise. As long as globally, our exchange rate holds ok, inflation is low, its fine.

Sharesies kids

Free kids accounts - trade shares and funds (NZ, US) with Sharesies (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32260 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1851191 23-Aug-2017 12:17

tdgeek:

networkn:

jonathan18:

Labour were in power for nine years, and the general consensus is they did a pretty good job with the country's finances; while those individuals responsible for this may no longer be there, it's not like they've simply abandoned the same relatively safe (and economically conservative - let's be honest, it's not like the Clarke government did a 180 on the post-1984 neo-right orthodoxy) approach.

I'm not a Labour Party stooge - in fact, I've never (yet) voted for them - but I give them a little more credit in terms of their fiscal management skills than others here clearly do. Indeed I start from the reasoned assumption they can be trusted to not financially mismanage this country, and focus on which party's policies I believe will be best for NZ's future.

Labour did "well" for NZ financially largely of Clarkes own admission that world wide pretty much everyone else was too. They had no huge challenges in their time in office that I can recall that put NZ under big financial or resource strain.

Its the same now. GFC was 2008, we were far less affected than other countries that were very intermingles in global banking.EQ had billions already collected under the EQ levy. Inflation has been low, trade has been fine, oil has trended down, all of these factors we cannot control. Not a lot different. Same with any NZ Govt in good or bad global times, no choice but to ride with it, so we look at home. Issues have ben left and left, now we have all these policies. If nothing else, Ahern has forced National to get up and start fixing whats been left unattended here

You keep claiming things were left "unattended". They were not left to rot, they were considered by the current, experienced financial leadership to be less important than other things, like reducing our debt and putting it's advisors on urgent matters like CHCH and Kiakoura and Wellington.

You seem unwilling to accept there are not unlimited resources for fixing everything at the same time.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1851192 23-Aug-2017 12:18

NZ First are trending down in polls the 5% line is approaching for them (last poll 8%) we could face the prospect of a two party parliament again, a horrific thought.

networkn

Networkn
32260 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1851193 23-Aug-2017 12:19

MikeB4:

NZ First are trending down in polls the 5% line is approaching for them (last poll 8%) we could face the prospect of a two party parliament again, a horrific thought.

Why?

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18612 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1851195 23-Aug-2017 12:25

New Zealand, the land of duopolies. It works for the supermarkets, so why not for politics?/[sarcasm]

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Oldmanakbar

110 posts

Master Geek

#1851245 23-Aug-2017 13:21

MikeB4:

NZ First are trending down in polls the 5% line is approaching for them (last poll 8%) we could face the prospect of a two party parliament again, a horrific thought.

Maybe I am over cynical, but I think if people are honest with themselves they know MMP is a thin veneer of proportional representation when you get the result that usually happens. Which is one party in the government is the bulk of that government and the rest are usually along for the ride and collecting a pay cheque.

Unless its a collection of smaller parties or a couple with almost equal footing then the pants are worn by one party. I struggle to see any big change happening this time. You are either going to end up with a Government with National in charge, or one with Labour in charge. Both will make some concessions to get the other people to join them and let them be in power, but those concessions are very rarely anything of major consequence. Very rarely will you see the members of a coalition disagree with each other on anything of substance. Yes, they might say something on twitter or on One News, but when it comes to vote time the Pants have it.

My point being, we for the most part have a two party parliament anyway. Yes yes theres x green mp's and x maori mp's and that fulla from out the back of Johnsonville, but in reality it is National vs <doesn't really matter for 3 years> or Labour vs <doesn't really matter for 3 years>. So having a two party parliament is not that much of a thing to be horrified about, you pretty much already have it. (In my opinion etc etc, I might be Jaded).

I could be suprised this election and the Greens/TOP/ALCP all form a government in equal thirds, stranger things have happened. But I doubt anyone here would bet money on that.

Sorry a bit off topic for this one, just responding to Mike's comment.

tdgeek

29671 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1851474 23-Aug-2017 19:57

networkn:

tdgeek:

networkn:

jonathan18:

Labour were in power for nine years, and the general consensus is they did a pretty good job with the country's finances; while those individuals responsible for this may no longer be there, it's not like they've simply abandoned the same relatively safe (and economically conservative - let's be honest, it's not like the Clarke government did a 180 on the post-1984 neo-right orthodoxy) approach.

I'm not a Labour Party stooge - in fact, I've never (yet) voted for them - but I give them a little more credit in terms of their fiscal management skills than others here clearly do. Indeed I start from the reasoned assumption they can be trusted to not financially mismanage this country, and focus on which party's policies I believe will be best for NZ's future.

Labour did "well" for NZ financially largely of Clarkes own admission that world wide pretty much everyone else was too. They had no huge challenges in their time in office that I can recall that put NZ under big financial or resource strain.

Its the same now. GFC was 2008, we were far less affected than other countries that were very intermingles in global banking.EQ had billions already collected under the EQ levy. Inflation has been low, trade has been fine, oil has trended down, all of these factors we cannot control. Not a lot different. Same with any NZ Govt in good or bad global times, no choice but to ride with it, so we look at home. Issues have ben left and left, now we have all these policies. If nothing else, Ahern has forced National to get up and start fixing whats been left unattended here

You keep claiming things were left "unattended". They were not left to rot, they were considered by the current, experienced financial leadership to be less important than other things, like reducing our debt and putting it's advisors on urgent matters like CHCH and Kiakoura and Wellington.

You seem unwilling to accept there are not unlimited resources for fixing everything at the same time.

EQ have had levies for decades. The Ch and KA EQ's are not funded from today. Roading. Its unattended. Congestion. Now, being election year, many plans. Housing, there is a crisis. How? WE support immigration, which I agree with, so why is there a housing crisis years later? IMO its been left to the market, as has been stated by National. It does allow a strong set of books. If I left expenditure on my houses and vehicles, my set of books will look good too. While this is my opinion, it gets stated often.

Now, if its decided to reduce debt, and not leave it to rot, I assume now, its time to get transport, housing up to date? Those that drive and want housing might see it another way.

End of there day, many here are extremely biased. To the Nats, or to Labour, or to Bill or to Jacinda. But a lot gets stated as facts, where in actual fact they are opinions only.

Should Labour sneak in, and IMHO thats less likely, then everything they do, no matter how great, will be criticised. Should Nats get in, which IMO is likely, there will be others to blame when the books fade. But the books will fade as we are having to spend now, what we should have been taking care of year on year. I guess blame Peters.

But its a politics forum. Its either all BLUES or its all REDS, with a few swing voters like me.

tdgeek

29671 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1851477 23-Aug-2017 19:58

MikeB4:

NZ First are trending down in polls the 5% line is approaching for them (last poll 8%) we could face the prospect of a two party parliament again, a horrific thought.

8%? WOW, OK. Thats from 13?

tdgeek

29671 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1851480 23-Aug-2017 20:07

Oldmanakbar:

MikeB4:

NZ First are trending down in polls the 5% line is approaching for them (last poll 8%) we could face the prospect of a two party parliament again, a horrific thought.

Maybe I am over cynical, but I think if people are honest with themselves they know MMP is a thin veneer of proportional representation when you get the result that usually happens. Which is one party in the government is the bulk of that government and the rest are usually along for the ride and collecting a pay cheque.

Unless its a collection of smaller parties or a couple with almost equal footing then the pants are worn by one party. I struggle to see any big change happening this time. You are either going to end up with a Government with National in charge, or one with Labour in charge. Both will make some concessions to get the other people to join them and let them be in power, but those concessions are very rarely anything of major consequence. Very rarely will you see the members of a coalition disagree with each other on anything of substance. Yes, they might say something on twitter or on One News, but when it comes to vote time the Pants have it.

My point being, we for the most part have a two party parliament anyway. Yes yes theres x green mp's and x maori mp's and that fulla from out the back of Johnsonville, but in reality it is National vs <doesn't really matter for 3 years> or Labour vs <doesn't really matter for 3 years>. So having a two party parliament is not that much of a thing to be horrified about, you pretty much already have it. (In my opinion etc etc, I might be Jaded).

I could be suprised this election and the Greens/TOP/ALCP all form a government in equal thirds, stranger things have happened. But I doubt anyone here would bet money on that.

Sorry a bit off topic for this one, just responding to Mike's comment.

Fair points. When there are coalition partners that does dilute control somewhat. But take Peter Dunne. Bill was quite negative, saying he supported confidence and supply. Thats it. He was there for 33 years, so a big thumbs down. When Winnie gets in, thats a different story. He will want, and get some of his policies going. What happens if he falls out with whoever he decides with? That could be a new election. End of the day, we voted them all in

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | ... | 45