Posts by Lucy Telfar Barnard
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Martin Lindberg,
I believe that's the point. It's not just that female politicians are horses; they're castrated male horses.
David, the possible reference to Grover Cleveland is fascinating, but I just don't buy it - the full quote was "Mr Jones said he had spent yesterday in and around Kerikeri and Kaitaia talking about the [women-only electorates] proposal, 'and the overwhelming response is the public doesn't want the country run by geldings.'"
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
I can completely hear some of the locals calling women geldings
No arguments there
but do wonder why Jones would choose to use it himself.
And that’s where the problem lies. Unless he was misquoted (and given that the quote was long, I doubt it), there's no excuse.
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Chris Waugh,
Yep, I could probably live with then.
-
If Shane Jones becomes leader, we'll also know what he thinks of his female colleagues.
I imagine some might claim "no, no, he doesn't think that himself, he's just saying what the public think." If that were the case, he wouldn't have used the word "geldings". I wasn't particularly bothered by the blue movies, but his choice to call women MPs geldings was repulsive.
I've been trying to think of an appropriate time for Shane to be leader. "Pigs flying", well, too easy to put one in a plane, or some other cheat. Blue moons happen with predictable regularity. And since Hell is in Norway, I imagine it freezes over quite regularly. All of those things are far too likely. I'm looking for something that means "Never, not ever, under no circumstances"...
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Sam M,
Indeed, I think it's far more relevant that Jacinda managed to reduce the incumbent's majority despite the overall drop in votes for the Labour Party.
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to ScottY,
That would be a fair point if all candidates had to start out in a marginal electorate before they got to run in a safe one, but they don’t.
The thing is, we never know how the electorate would have voted if someone else had been running. It could be that what was a marginal seat in the last election has moved further to the left or right since then, and that winning or losing reflects that general shift rather than the calibre of the candidate.
That's not to say the candidate makes no difference, just that it's not just the candidate that makes the difference.
-
I too think the “must win an electorate seat” argument is a red herring. Being able to win your electorate seat has far more to do with which electorate an MP is allowed to run in than it has to do with the MP’s political abilities. Yes, getting the nomination in a safe electorate is some indication of the standing you’re held in by the party, but so is a high party list spot.
In addition, I think I’d prefer my local MP not to be Prime Minister. I can’t imagine the PM has as much time available for electorate issues and engagements as those who have less onerous parliamentary roles. -
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
See, now you've made my brain automatically jump to images of politicians applying daily applications of olive oil. That's just, ... *runs away screaming in horror*
-
So, does anyone know who’s in the ABC club? Or rather, since I’m sure someone does, can anyone tell me?
I've tried googling, and that suggests Trevor Mallard is ABC, but who else?
-
Hard News: So long, and thanks for all…, in reply to Tom Semmens,
After all, most of them are in safe electorates and they may fancy their chances as cross bench Peter Dunnes under MMP.
They may be in safe Labour electorates. It doesn't mean they're in safe Personal electorates. Still, would be interesting to watch.