Hard News: Democracy Night
773 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 10 11 12 13 14 … 31 Newer→ Last
-
Ross Mason, in reply to
Anyone seeing a pattern here?
Ummm...no.
Unless it is a Penrose non periodic "pattern".
Hmmm...since 1949.
By years in office:
N2;N3;N3;L3;N3;N3;N3;N3;L3;N3;N3;N3;L3;L3;N3;N3;N3;
L3;L3;L3;N3:N3 (assumed)By governments:
N3;L1;N4;L1;N3;L2;N3;L3;N2Pretty random??? Certainly no repeating pattern. But the "Ls" seem to be increasing the intervals they govern....and the "N's" look like they are decreasing the intervals they govern.
I have of course ignored the elections from the first labour govt and the war. I think the second half of the 20th century covers most of those alive at the moment.
-
Hebe, in reply to
I mean, realistically, I suspect that on election day, more Green voters were turned out by the Labour Party than by the Green Party.
Disagree. And there's that same mindset I have been dissing. In spite of this, some of my dearest friends are long-time Labour; truly :-)
-
Christopher Dempsey, in reply to
If I were in Epsom, I would have seen a vote for Goldsmith not as a ‘vote for the right’, but as a “Fuck you, ACT. Sincerely, the left”.
I live in Parnell, which is lumped in with the dreaded Epsom electorate.
I voted for Goldsmith, being tactical cause you know, if a numpty up the road is going to play tactical, I will too. And my vote for Goldsmith (as opposed to who I really thought would be the best person for the job) was in fact a ‘fingers up’ to ACT.
This is the third election in a row here where the tactical voting is the only game in town for this electorate. Given that the lefties in Epsom are in the minority I suggest it incumbent to *think* carefully about how you vote. Last time voting tactically for the left would have made no difference in any case, given the commanding lead Hide had, and it was clear from the general election sentiment prior to voting day that he was supported by many righties.
This time around, given the polling, given the buffoonery of ACT, given the sentiments being expressed, one should have thought carefully about the chances of just maybe casting a vote for the other candidate to knock the one you really don’t want out. The possibility that you might have succeed would be higher than previous times. See, the calculations needed to figure out whether it is worth tactically voting on the left is somewhat complex.
I think being left in a seat where circumstances set up situations such as this is both tiring, and well, tantalizing – just one election all the stars might align and you might just knock the one person you don’t really want out by voting for the other side. But that’s just one election and it hasn’t happened yet. I wonder when it will?
-
Or will ACT self destruct before then?
-
Islander, in reply to
That-
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
After several years of seeing Banks in action as Auckland mayor, it is a bit surprising that other residents of the area that vote left didn’t also hold their noses and vote right.
It’s not so surprising when long-running political tribalism among certain people trumps pragmatic strategic voting.
I’ve said it before, but changing the electorate voting system to a preferential/STV one would be a good start. What’s currently in place is a relic of the FPP era.
I think also if Carol Beaumont can't take Maungakiekie from Invisible Sam, then maybe David Parker can.
-
Minor note: a number of commentators – Matt McCarten for one – are saying that NZF took Labour votes. I’m not so sure about that – I think it’s very likely that National took a lot of votes that Labour might have earned, but likewise, a lot of votes that went to National in 2008 went back to NZF. I don’t think that one can take correlations at face value.
NZF strikes me as the ghost of Muldoon, that is, the old National Party tribe: a paternalistic, nationalist, populist, social conservative/reactionary party based on the appeal of a charismatic leader who can tell a gripping yarn to a certain sector of loyal followers.
I am not, of course, a fan of Peters or his style of politics (it’s trendy to call Key a psychopath, but Peters fits the profile pretty well too), but McCarten’s analysis shows the naivete that the “left” have in their view of the “right” – it’s potentially just as fractured as the various Judean Fronts/Fronts of Judea in Life of Brian, with social conservatives aghast at the internationalist neoliberals while many of the paleoleft, epitomised by T’ Standard, will happily go through all sorts of moral contortions to justify voting for NZF because Peters isn’t John Key, the perfect example of Homo ipsum (well “ipsum” is what Google Translate says is the Latin for “corporate"… kinda appropriate as Lorem ipsum is the graphic designer’s boilerplate copytext – ie, bland space-filler). I’ll stick by my opinion that people started voting for NZF not because they were suddenly convinced that they should, but realised that they could – again.
“Waitakere Man” (even though I would like to think of him as Piltdown Man) does seem to exist. One of my brothers is Dunedin’s answer to that, coming from a Labour-supporting family and turning to vote National, motivated particularly by finding that labour laws were having a negative effect – as he saw it – on his engineering business, and he started as an apprentice engineer in the Dunedin woolscour, an impeccably working-class origin. He could very well vote for Chris Trotter’s hallucination of what Labour “should” be.
On the other hand, both Craig, a former National supporter, and me, a former (even tribal) Labour supporter have voted Green.
Whatever happens on the surface with various “right” and “left” parties*, the underlying culture is changing radically and talking about parties owning their tribes’ votes is not only vile, it’s downright stupid.
*As an intellectual exercise, consider the meaning of “liberal” and “conservative” and then add the modifiers “social” and “economic” to them. It’s easy, and you end up with four very different ideologies.
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
Or will ACT self destruct before then?
The last shred of ACT futtered out when Parliament wound up and Douglas et al toddled off to ill-deserved obscurity. What's left is the stolen identity of a dead party.
-
Sacha, in reply to
graphic designer's boilerplate copytext
and now there's hipster ipsum or even bacon ipsum
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
He could very well vote for Chris Trotter’s hallucination of what Labour “should” be.
So my comparisons with Essex Man/Reagan Democrat seem to hold water.
On the other hand, Urban Archipelago believes the left should stick to the cities instead of pandering to ‘Joe Sixpack and his Dixie-draped pickup truck’.
*As an intellectual exercise, consider the meaning of “liberal” and “conservative” and then add the modifiers “social” and “economic” to them. It’s easy, and you end up with four very different ideologies.
Sounds remarkably like the Political Compass. And their NZ election chart is now updated for 2011.
-
Kracklite, in reply to
Sounds remarkably like the Political Compass
Yep, and I’ll throw in Maslov’s hierarchy of needs just to complicate matters, though in practice, it's often been demonstrated that pride can trump sustenance.
-
And if the Granny's predictions are correct, it could be the Three Davids vs the Two Johnnies.
-
DexterX, in reply to
b) The "brain drain" has slowed under National.
Only the stupid remain?
-
Hebe,
From the Herald re Labour leadership: "A potential pairing of David Cunliffe and Lianne Dalziel" . The scream team? As a Green I'm happy with this.
-
Oh well Nikki is only 500 ahead with 6000 special votes on Auckland Central to be counted.
6000 special votes cast in Auckland Central - many of which will be from people on the North Shore, or the West, or just about anywhere in Auckland who were going to be in the city, so decided to vote there, rather than in their home electorates.
-
Kracklite, in reply to
And their NZ election chart is now updated for 2011
I’d like to see their methodology laid out, but as I have mild dyscalculia, the figures won’t mean much to me.
This is interesting, and reflects a trend I see thought what used to be called “The West”:
With the ideological gap between the main parties narrowing, issues of identity politics have largely replaced the great clashes of vision that older New Zealanders remember. Politicians of conviction seem increasingly outnumbered by politicians of mere career.
People on the other hand engage with politics through single issues, or mosaic alliances. With no authority or reputation whatsoever as a political analyst, I’ll recall that The Economist voiced befuddlement and scepticism at the anti-globalisation movements because the groups represented in the mass protests would oppose each other against other issues. 9/11 put a dampener on that movement, but the Occupy movement seems to represent is resurrection, and once again, it’s being attacked as vague, incoherent and temporary, but all of these criticisms miss the point, I think. People seem to have started seeing government as a ulitity, like the power and water supply. They’re happy with technocrats, providing that they’re responsive, and hate ideologues (consider the popularity of the US Congress now). Popular participation in politics is not through consistent devotion to a specific party, but around a specific given issue. Alliances will form, act and then dissolve, and then reform in new configurations with new issues.
Whether that is viable, sustainable in the long term, or a distant last on the list, better, I have no idea, but that seems to be the way things are drifting and reflects the nature of society now.
Disclaimers apply: I’m no political science expert by any means.
-
I’m annoyed that more Green party voters didn’t give their electorate vote to Jacinda Ardern, because I think that getting rid of Nikki Kaye would have sent a really important message to National
That it would have, Joshua – I totally get and respect that Auckland public transport, and the CBD Rail Loop in particular, is a really big issue for you. And totally sincere non-bitchy “on ya!” to you for it.
But you want to know a little secret – you want Nikki, and a lot more people like her, in the National caucus. Srsly. (And just as a side bar, for the term of the next Parliament could the Herald please try really hard to remember that Kaye, Adern & Roche are not “babes” but adult women. Thanks.)
-
Or alternatively, we can ask Granny to develop a list of parliamentary studs - you know - Nathan Guy and Chris Tremain. These boys are hot studs alright...
-
Kracklite, in reply to
are not “babes” but adult women
And while I very much respect Brian Edwards, especially after what he has done for Phil Goff lately, ew.
-
Hebe, I don't know how to put it politely, but I don't think you have a very good grasp of the Christchurch Labour Party's views on the Greens.
-
Steve Parks, in reply to
for the term of the next Parliament could the Herald please try really hard to remember that Kaye, Adern & Roche are not “babes” but adult women.
And not just the Herald either. It almost became de rigueur for media to refer the Auckland Central race as ’The Battle of the Babes”. It was as if once someone had used it, it was okay to just keep repeating the phrase.
-
Hebe, in reply to
parliamentary studs - you know - Nathan Guy and Chris Tremain. These boys are hot studs alright...
Laws against that kind of thing surely? The one thing the MPs I have met have never persuaded me of is their "hotness" quotient. But then media kept referring to John Key as "young" - only in that world or a Grey Power meeting.
-
Steve Parks, in reply to
The situation with ACT now is pretty messed-up.
My understanding is that the ACT support-base is mostly aligned with classical liberal/Libertarian positions represented by the likes of Stephen Whittington.
Meanwhile, their one representative in parliament is John Banks, homophobe. -
Steve Parks, in reply to
Laws against that kind of thing surely?
Yeah, he'd probably just have them shot.
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
And while I very much respect Brian Edwards, especially after what he has done for Phil Goff lately, ew.
Is there anyone to take Edwards' place when he retires?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.