At the end of the day our political parties should be implementing a common good for all New Zealanders. Regardless of origin.
-
During peak periods, this site will only be accessible to registered members of the site. Login or create an account to participate in the discussion.
Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics
- Thread starter wizard of Tauranga
- Start date
Echo chambers are good to step out of every now and then.
And the majority of NZ’ers clearly believe they are implementing common good regardless of origin. Just because it doesn’t sit well with your ideology doesn’t make it wrong.
Absolutely. But I’ve watched Janet Wilson staunchly support national over the years and just found her concerns interesting. You speak of the majority but looking at the numbers that actually turn out to vote each year in low numbers, it goes to show right across the political party spectrum just how uninspiring they are. You have no right to bitch and moan if you don’t bother to vote but the candidates and policies are aren’t inspiring a decent part of the population
A cobbled together coalition that hardly had a majority, no problem there. Absolutely not for the common good, only for the wealthy
Clearly not just for the wealthy because whichever way you want to dice it, it’s a solid and increasing majority of NZ’ers that are supporting the right. And it’s probably best you get use to it because it’s more likely than not they will win a second term in 2 years time.
It would be good to understand the impact of all the swathe of cuts, to pay for the billions in a tax cut we can't afford that directly benefits the rich.
JustLikeStartingOver
Contributor
Hardly, 20% don't vote, another 60% vote for the side they always vote for regardless of performance or competence, the remaining 20% decide the election - everytime - and they mostly vote on the economy. High interest rates - Hipkins out. The current clown car have done nothing but cut services to restore dignity to landlords, otherwise things remain as they were.
Far more articulate than me
dude. the country was in a hole.
people were ready for change.
there were two choices;
- someone who’d run our national airline to five? years running best airline in the world.
and
- someone whose crowning glory was being thrown under the bus by a predecessor who realized her people had lost the love they once had for her.
hardly inspired choices, i know. but someone’s gotta win and someone’s gotta lose, right?
if you’re correct with all the things you say/think/post we’ll be able to see that at the end of the term, and it’ll be curtains for them. if not?
well then shit. maybe they’ll get another term.
It wasn’t interest rates that voted Labour out, however if you want to go down that path, then that bodes well for National. We’ll start to see interest rate cuts as early as next month, almost definitely by November, at which point the economy will very gradually begin to recover from its current lows. Within 2 years our economy should be growing nicely again, employment will be improving and people will be feeling happier.
With regards to your last sentence, sure, doesn't matter if I'm correct or not, I doubt I'll sway any voters. Certainly not the ones on here
It’s going to take a bit for some to forgive labour for not implementing the changes they could have with the first clear majority since mmp arrived. The cannabis referendum was very smart on their part to combine with the election, though Chloe Swarbrick was the one leading that movement. Seymour had his platform too with his euthanasia bill. It’s going to be interesting to watch on with labour not having the courage to make changes to enflame their voter base, though likely hamstrung trying to work it’s way through a world changing pandemic but watching national and what it’s had no qualms in implementing things they never campaigned on or mentioned they were considering will be interesting to see how voters respond in the next election. They are hugely reliant on the economy seeing growth and people feeling optimistic but as labour learnt, worldwide issues can have a large bearing. Think the last two elections highlighted two big problems with politics in this country. One being what can be achieved with coalition partners and a majority making changes that the majority of voters feel positively about, and the other being the wastage of money when administrations change and things put in place cost the taxpayer through cancellation fees and wastage in general
JustLikeStartingOver
Contributor
Which would have happened regardless of last years result - challenge for baldy will be seeing that Shane jones, who could be bribed with a ham sandwich, that climate cooker up north and the rest don’t embarrass his government too much in the mean time - Seymour is already leading him around by the nose as it is.
The opposite are not being credible though, greens are full of grifters masking themselves, labour don’t even know what they are anymore, spent most of their last term allowing money to flow to consultants to make some stuff up for some poorly thought out policies and squandering their mandate
Labour not having the courage to make changes is the key here.
Left in NZ, Aus, and the US splintering and all almost entirely their own faults. Hubris?
- Thread starter
- #9,597
Hipkins came in and scrapped many things because they couldn’t make them work successfully. Kiwibuild, airport train, reducing prison population, centralising polytechs, etc.
Courage to do more will just make things even worse if you can’t action them successfully.
I think the lesson is research and ensure your promises are deliverable and sensible.
- Thread starter
- #9,598
This thread will show where our political ideas align through the extreme emojis -
, 
, 
Sign of the fascist times. What left? All we have is neoliberal lite, apart from the Greens and TPM.
Democrats are full neoliberal.
Jacinda must have got close to breaking the world record for hubris… although our current leader is prone to bouts of it as well.