Posts by Kracklite
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Democracy Night, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Actually Craig, I was expressing my scepticism of such simplistic equations – it is, sorry about the jargon, a falsifiable hypothesis that has indeed been falsified. Add some quote marks to the “should” (there, I’ve done it).
Not for the first time, I think voters are a little more complex
I agree with you.
-
Danyl has a reasonable-looking analysis here.
In other media there’s analysis of the respective effectiveness of the various campaigns, but how much of a decision to vote is based on diffuse, slowly-established impressions? Campaigns and their events, I think tend to trigger or enable decisions, not directly determine them.
For example:
If National is so publicly committed to asset sales and there is such overwhelming opposition, then logically, they should have lost badly. On the other hand, National has had a strong brand, a popular leader who’s been kept away from arguments and moreover, his whole party and the parasite parties have more or less consistently been unified in their support of him.
Labour on the other hand, for two and a half years was complacent, meandering between various me-toos and Phil Goff underwent more costume changes than Lady Gaga, but they managed to be both more absurd and deeply, deeply boring at once. The front benches are despised, smug and indolent. I’ve compared them to the late Soviet Politburo, but I could compare them to the deposed Bourbons as well. They need to start promoting their backbenchers and unifying them into a team NOW, but the incumbents sitting like soggy Christmas Puddings in front of them will have forgotten nothing and learned nothing.
The Greens throughout have been stable, not scary, and Meteria Turei in particular has been in public approachable, confident and quick-witted without being snarky.
Winston First’s percentage points didn’t just come out of nowhere, they came out of long memories of Peters’ charm and aggro (as perceived by his followers). They’re over their breakup, now they’ve kissed and made up and everything’s rosy again.
Well, the counting of the specials is going to be interesting…
-
Hard News: Democracy Night, in reply to Hebe,
The smile doesn’t reach his eyes.
It never did.
He certainly doesn’t have the unbridled power he thought he was due. No matter what the specials do (which are likely to erode his lead), what he wanted as a second choice was reliable and significant coalition partners. Instead, he’s got one vote from the Vicar of Bray, one from Act who’s certain to embarrass him with some damnfool public pronouncements, and perhaps three from a very badly frightened Maori Party who can’t be seen to be supporting Act – and then Winston in the debating chamber relishing his opportunities for revenge.
It’s likely to be fun from a distance. Apparently Gliese 581g is a good prospect, if its existence is confirmed, Gliese 581d if not, at 20.3 light years.
-
Hard News: Democracy Night, in reply to Kumara Republic,
Does he seriously mean the Kiwi equivalent of Essex Man/Reagan Democrat?
Piltdown Man, methinks.
-
Hard News: Democracy Night, in reply to Joe Wylie,
Witty.
-
Filthy assistants hand me my bowel disruptor because someone is just full of shit.
David Parker is “bloody proud of Phil Goff” and adds that, “People haven’t yet come home to Labour. They will eventually.”
-
Hard News: Democracy Night, in reply to Sacha,
Wonder if that’s helping NZ First this time? Could be a contributor to Conservative vote too I guess. Tentatively.
Good point. While I’m of the liberal-green persuasion, I can’t discount the conservative element that has not liked the neoliberalism of modern National (+Act), and the “Waitakere Man” that would vote Labour if it were not so overrun by gaggles of gays – another reason for my disdain for the one-dimensional left/right dichotomy.
National, it has to be said, has shown admirable party discipline over the last three years, and traditionally, unity has been respected by the NZ electorate.
In the longer run though, will the tensions of the “right” between neoliberal and reactionary lead to an irrevocable split, will something analogous happen to the “left” (as it seems to have done already)?
I think – and hope – that Kathryn Ryan’s traditional “From the Right and from the Left…” opening on Nine to Noon will be as irrelevant as “From the Guelph and from the Ghibelline…” – but when will they realise that and what will be their replacement?
In short, I don't think that there will be something so simple as a resurgent Labour Party toppling the dictatorship of Key in 2014. It'll be a coalition of disparate forces, perhaps facing a party that has itself begun to fracture - or if it it has not, one that has itself become disconnected from its supposedly unified body of constituents.
-
Hard News: Democracy Night, in reply to Sacha,
Looks like MMP wins
In the relatively long term (in political terms), that's the vote that matters, and I'm glad that it's turned out that way. Had it lost, it's likely that former MMP supporters would have overwhelmed FPP with votes for STV or whatever anyway. That's the positive outcome for me.
Considering the Greens' usual strong polling before an election and the collapse on the day, the showing of 10+% today is good, despite the optimistic predictions of up to 15%.
Winston First's showing doesn't surprise me.
Labour, I hope, won't just learn but apply its lessons.
-
Hard News: Last Words, in reply to Sacha,
<cough> Um, yes...
-
Hard News: Last Words, in reply to Stewart,
Sue Bradford *
I have a lot of respect for her, I have to say. I don't always agree on some (or many) specifics, but I certainly respect her and would vote for her unreservedly if she was my electorate candidate.
One of the differences - and a critical one, I think - is that MMP in intention and in practice turns power over to parliament rather than cabinet, where they are bound by collective responsibility and which too often takes on a coercive quality.
In classical terms, I'll take a Hydra over a Cyclops.
That leads me both to regret the fact that Geoffrey Palmer was Prime Minister at the wrong time, when the phone was already off the hook, and to celebrate the fact that he was in such a position at all.