Posts by Barnard
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Triangulated by Fools, in reply to BenWilson,
There are two directions they can strike. Left is where they probably have the richest pickings if the want to be a bigger party. But if it comes entirely at the cost of their coalition partners, it’s not going to win an election. Right is a direction in which their support will probably stay the same size, but each vote that they take from National counts towards their chances.
I tend to agree with The Egonomist, that it need not be defined in terms of going 'left' or 'right', but in terms of changing the question in the minds of public, and then being seen to have innovative 21st solutions to those questions.
I think that what's behind The Greens success, rather than them simply being seen to be of the left of Labour.
To me the biggest failing of the whole 'third way' thing is there's such banal assumptions as to what people care about. If you start with those assumptions or don't challenge them, then of course anything traditionally Labour will be seen as 'nanny state', 'anti aspirational', 'anti growth' and a 'drift left' loses you votes. -
Hard News: Triangulated by Fools, in reply to Tom Semmens,
The membership has again moved considerably to the left of the caucus,
Memberships of most major parties are to the left/right of their caucuses. And whilst a political party should be democratic, they do have to win over the public not their own members. The whole drift the neo liberal orthodoxy is one of the reasons I'm no longer a Labour voter, but by the same token they'd hardly be the first party to shoot themselves in the foot by the membership being totally out of sink with the public they need to win over.
I think it's a case of be careful what you wish for. -
Hard News: Triangulated by Fools, in reply to BenWilson,
Not sure. We have MMP here. It won’t be a Labour government, it will be a coalition.
Of course, but if that's to happen & especially if it's to happen without relying on Winston then Labour do need to be taking votes off National & targeting the current crop of non voters.
My concern is perceived instability or perceived factional self interest can easily be used to scare the first lot, and be a disincentive to the second lot to bother. -
Expecting to win an election because you're the default choice when people are tired of National is a terrible strategy,
Do you think the infighting nonsense aside, last weekend was sign that that's changing?
There's certainly seemed to be the beginnings of a coherent strategy emerge. -
Hard News: Triangulated by Fools, in reply to BenWilson,
I'm not sure about that. They've slowly risen in the polls all the time that this division has been there.
Surely it's likely to be more of an issue the closer you get to an election, or the more plausible the idea of Labour government becomes?
I must say, all this has given me even greater admiration for the Greens ability to have quite strong principled differences over direction without it coming across as a public meltdown.
Is that, and the generational difference in Labour a sign that those who know nothing but the MMP era have a fundamentally difference way of thinking?
If it is it can only be a positive. -
Hard News: Calling the race before it's over, in reply to Hilary Stace,
The ‘left’ in NZ is a much bigger group than the ‘right’ and always has been probably since the early days of pakeha settlement.
You sure?
Since 2nd WW there’s been I think 22 elections, Nats have come out as the biggest party in 14, Labour in 8. Ok, a couple of those were badly distorted by FPTP, and you can argue over what’s ‘left’ ,what’s ‘right’ & what’s ‘centre’, which has been further complicated by MMP but I don’t see how you can argue the left has always been ‘much bigger’.
I’m also wary of attributing simplistic attributes to left and right as well, there’s very much been an authoritarian left which puts an emphasis on order over democracy, and classic liberals if not actual libertarians who’d you’d usually label ‘right’ would certainly argue they very much believe in a diversity of views.
Also whilst I do completely accept the centre right do tend to fall into line much quicker and easier than the left, historically that’s been more People’s front of Judeaism as it has been a love of democratic debate.
-
Hard News: Calling the race before it's over, in reply to Andre Alessi,
But for all I know, the challenge could genuinely have been as personality-driven and non-ideological as it appeared. If that’s the case, I’m surprised the challenge garnered as much attention as it did.
I'm not, it just reflects how politics is no longer presented as a battle of than of ideas. Obsession with soap opera is a natural extension of that.
Can we dispense with this absurd fantasy that Labour would be doing just fine if David Cunliffe was poet-in-residence at Harvard?
It's no more an absurd fantasy than the one that Labour would be doing just fine if only David Cunliffe was leader
-
Hard News: Calling the race before it's over, in reply to Andre Alessi,
You haven’t missed it, it’s been practically nonexistent. Which isn’t to say it’s not true, just that it’s never been laid out in public as an actual disagreement on the politics of the two men, which you could read as deliberate on the part of both participants, or as a failing on the part of commentators, or both.
I guess the irony is that so long as speculation over the leadership exists a mature out in the open battles of ideas isn't going to happen.
That seems to be the other thing Cuncliffe's backers on the blogs don't seem to grasp, if they are privy to this information about him they're failing spectacularly to get that across, it appears to the rest of us as just petty and mean. -
Hard News: Calling the race before it's over, in reply to BenWilson,
I’m guessing, but I suspect
Is the tale of this weekend.
Sure, but whether it's innocent or deliberate there does seem an unwillingness from DC and his supporter to grasp both how these things _always_ play out in the media, and the damage it's likely to do. I can't help but think they could easily have done a lot more to knock it on it's head without undermining the validity of February's vote.
-
Er, that should read 'hasn't stopped...'