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 | ... | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33

16904 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2477243 5-May-2020 20:13

Kiwiblog has an old article with this: (Colmar Brunton)

Kiwiblog: Clark has appalling ratings and was at 5% for most of the next three years. Her rating lifted to 17% just before the 1996 election. She then polled at between 20% and 30% while National and NZ First had their stormy term in Government.

1996 was a loss for Labour. In part because NZ First went into a National Party coalition. Mainly because Labour lost several seats. We also have your graph saying Clark was at 24% at the time of the following 1999 election which she won.

What does your NZE study data give for Clark in 1996?

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

gzt

16904 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2477249 5-May-2020 20:25

Looks like the Colmar Brunton data is needed to get a better picture of Clark in 1996 and 1999 over the 12 months leading up to the last pre-election poll before each election.

gzt

16904 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2477272 5-May-2020 20:40

Coincidentally, Bridges released National's alternative Covid business support policy today:

https://www.national.org.nz/national_would_get_new_zealand_working_again

Based on six months GST: Cash GST refund up to 100k + additional 5 year loan based on GST value up to 250k + up to 145k deprc per capital item allowed in one year.

Handle9

11157 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2477442 6-May-2020 01:06

Fred99:

gzt:
Bridges did an excellent job holding up National Party poll ratings until Covid gave the government an advantage, which is understandable. Bridges will campaign in this election for the first ever as party leader. He appears very competent as an opposition leader, more than competent enough to win an election imo.

His highest poll result as preferred PM is 10%. I think you're dreaming - most National Party voters don't want him as PM.

Post C-19 anything goes. There's lots of talk about "change" and promises being made "for the better" (whatever and for whom that means). I'm more pessimistic, fear and greed seem to be what drives the economy, recessions only exacerbate wealth inequality - which seems to be the driver for cynical authoritarian populism, the money borrowed to keep the economy from complete collapse (maybe) is going to have to be paid back - and those that have the most to lose are going to fight hardest to hold onto what they've got.
It must be getting near time for Bridges to start talking about his plans for "economic recovery". He's clearly very upset about how the government has reacted to the pandemic - but all I've seen from him is cheap shots based on notions that the government "overreacted".
I guess GST raised significantly, selling off assets, and "austerity" for the masses would be a par for the course conservative path to recovery.

Cunliffe and Bridges suffer from the same problem - they both come across as dickheads.

The election will be decided on the economy and how bad it gets. If things are not too bad economically then some form of Labour Greens coalition will win pretty handily.

If the economic situation is a total disaster then it's Nationals to lose. The coalitions record of actually getting things done isn't good and coupled with a disastrous economy then the incumbent should probably lose.

I found this a pretty fair article about Arderns issues - amazing in crisis but like Key and Clark not willing to take too many chances to make a difference.

https://democracyproject.nz/2020/05/05/cat-maclennan-jacinda-arderns-prime-ministership-is-a-tale-of-two-leaders/

GV27

5872 posts

Uber Geek

#2477458 6-May-2020 07:30

Handle9:

Cunliffe and Bridges suffer from the same problem - they both come across as dickheads.

The election will be decided on the economy and how bad it gets. If things are not too bad economically then some form of Labour Greens coalition will win pretty handily.

If the economic situation is a total disaster then it's Nationals to lose. The coalitions record of actually getting things done isn't good and coupled with a disastrous economy then the incumbent should probably lose.

I found this a pretty fair article about Arderns issues - amazing in crisis but like Key and Clark not willing to take too many chances to make a difference.

https://democracyproject.nz/2020/05/05/cat-maclennan-jacinda-arderns-prime-ministership-is-a-tale-of-two-leaders/

The real tragedy is that if Labour had actually made progress on even half of what they said it would, then it would have been great. Even if it was just Kiwibuild working, or urban reform, or improved mass transit in our city centres. But none of those things are actually happening yet at the speed we were told they would, despite them being desperately needed. Covid19 has let Labour off the hook on those, but we shouldn't forget that they were key policy platforms and used to attack National (rightly) for their relative inaction.

Ultimately, I have to ask the question: Are people any better off today than they would have been had Bill English's social investment policies been allowed to unfold? English and Finlayson were big losses, less so Joyce but still a competent Finance Minister. I find it hard to believe things would be much worse than they are now had those three been at the helm, and perhaps we would have seen some of the bigger problems in the senior Nats group simply retire instead of sticking around.

JaseNZ

2576 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2481854 12-May-2020 12:33

Winston and his 72.5 million funding for racing. I am sorry but just no, so wrong imo and just a waste of money.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

Varkk

643 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2481886 12-May-2020 13:21

JaseNZ:

Winston and his 72.5 million funding for racing. I am sorry but just no, so wrong imo and just a waste of money.

And directly contradicting Jacinda Adern and Dr Bloomfield around funeral rules.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2482027 12-May-2020 15:32

Varkk:

JaseNZ:

Winston and his 72.5 million funding for racing. I am sorry but just no, so wrong imo and just a waste of money.

And directly contradicting Jacinda Adern and Dr Bloomfield around funeral rules.

Was that where he suggested that a funeral "gathering" would be okay in a hall etc if they seated in groups of fewer than 10 per group?

His funding of the Sport of Kings by the peasants has been standard Peters for many decades. It's only one of very many reasons I'd never vote for him.

MikeAqua

7769 posts

Uber Geek

#2482043 12-May-2020 16:10

Handle9:

I found this a pretty fair article about Arderns issues - amazing in crisis but like Key and Clark not willing to take too many chances to make a difference.

https://democracyproject.nz/2020/05/05/cat-maclennan-jacinda-arderns-prime-ministership-is-a-tale-of-two-leaders/

Ardern has done a fine job handling three crises. Her reactive governance has been strong in these situation.

Where she falls down in my view, is on proactive governance. She promised big on the campaign trail. Most key policies are undelivered - GCT, housing, child-poverty, climate change. Most indicators have gone backwards.

Ironically, COVID has enabled the govt's only real policy win so far - to house many homeless people - in vacant hotels/motels.

Similarly, COVID will probably help with housing too, as demand for AirBnB will drop, with a reduction in tourism.

It's an interesting track record. limited success, and even that only off the back of tragedy.

Mike

tdgeek

29585 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482156 12-May-2020 19:10

JaseNZ:

Winston and his 72.5 million funding for racing. I am sorry but just no, so wrong imo and just a waste of money.

Why? It supports employment, I heard 15000 employees, another 60,000+ in direct support industries, export of bloodstock and racing stock. NZ is highly rated internationally. Maybe you are put off by the gambling side, that funds the industry? Think of it as a sport that provides employment and overseas dollars.

tdgeek

29585 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482159 12-May-2020 19:16

MikeAqua:

Handle9:

I found this a pretty fair article about Arderns issues - amazing in crisis but like Key and Clark not willing to take too many chances to make a difference.

https://democracyproject.nz/2020/05/05/cat-maclennan-jacinda-arderns-prime-ministership-is-a-tale-of-two-leaders/

Ardern has done a fine job handling three crises. Her reactive governance has been strong in these situation.

Where she falls down in my view, is on proactive governance. She promised big on the campaign trail. Most key policies are undelivered - GCT, housing, child-poverty, climate change. Most indicators have gone backwards.

Ironically, COVID has enabled the govt's only real policy win so far - to house many homeless people - in vacant hotels/motels.

Similarly, COVID will probably help with housing too, as demand for AirBnB will drop, with a reduction in tourism.

It's an interesting track record. limited success, and even that only off the back of tragedy.

Yeah, maybe. CGT didn't fail, it was decided against after a lot of involvement by many, both in the WG and outside of it. Housing was a non issue, it had already failed in this country. Should have recognised it was too late, yes on that. At least an effort was tried.Id like a list of what was done by both, that would be interesting.

JaseNZ

2576 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2482160 12-May-2020 19:16

tdgeek:

JaseNZ:

Winston and his 72.5 million funding for racing. I am sorry but just no, so wrong imo and just a waste of money.

Why? It supports employment, I heard 15000 employees, another 60,000+ in direct support industries, export of bloodstock and racing stock. NZ is highly rated internationally. Maybe you are put off by the gambling side, that funds the industry? Think of it as a sport that provides employment and overseas dollars.

One of a handful of sports that if it weren't for gambling, wouldn't exist because so few watch it purely for interest.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

tdgeek

29585 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482176 12-May-2020 19:43

JaseNZ:

One of a handful of sports that if it weren't for gambling, wouldn't exist because so few watch it purely for interest.

There is no shortage of interest in watching this sport. Whether it be from owners, breeders, or the man in the street when it comes to the big race day, or the big car race day or the big tennis grand slam day. Its sport. Sports cannot fund themselves, they require sponsorship and TV rights. Horse racing is the same, they also get funding from gambling. Its a business, I don't see the issue. Its an employer and a provider of overseas funds, and NZ is a key player.

JaseNZ

2576 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2482286 12-May-2020 23:15

tdgeek:

There is no shortage of interest in watching this sport. Whether it be from owners, breeders, or the man in the street when it comes to the big race day, or the big car race day or the big tennis grand slam day. Its sport. Sports cannot fund themselves, they require sponsorship and TV rights. Horse racing is the same, they also get funding from gambling. Its a business, I don't see the issue. Its an employer and a provider of overseas funds, and NZ is a key player.

Yup I understand what you are saying but I would say the horses don't agree. But they are only horses right so doesn't matter.

Sorry for straying off topic I won't comment any more on it.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

Handle9

11157 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482318 13-May-2020 05:14

tdgeek:
Yeah, maybe. CGT didn't fail, it was decided against after a lot of involvement by many, both in the WG and outside of it. Housing was a non issue, it had already failed in this country. Should have recognised it was too late, yes on that. At least an effort was tried.Id like a list of what was done by both, that would be interesting.

Lol. CGT was a dismal failure - it's a policy that Ardern believes in but didn't really try to push.

The repeated spinelessness to introduce policies that may negatively affect boomers (from both sides) shows admirable electoral realism and zero willingness to confront inequity.

1 | ... | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33