Politics šŸ—³ļø NZ Politics

NZWarriors.com
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
You are funny. Its not an issue but then proceed to post more about it being an issue. :ROFLMAO: The turks have deleted all of your ewww Luxon is a fundamentalist Christian posts.

It's as funny as Bruce's "It's not an issue if he is gay" and then continue posting about it.
What a really nuanced thought out reply on the topic... I was replying to miket post you big fragile baby.

You realise I didn't write those articles eh?

And it's totally reasonable for the media or public to wonder how suitable about a potential PM / PM when they believe woman who have had an abortion have committed and act of murder or endorse a church that believes homosexuality is a sinful perversion of god.

What's your explanation on Luxon's public trust levels being so low? & they way he needs to white wash his beliefs definitely contributes.

Glib posts and emojis seems to be about the limit of your contributions.
 

Think Hipkins should retain the leadership.
He's history. You could tell by the body language and facial expressions after that caucus meeting that the punters weren't a happy group. My take is he had to stay as no one else wanted the chalice just yet but the waters are murky.

He's probably got 3 months of grace until the issue needs to be resolved but I expect it may not take that long and he will fall on his sword (with a push) or get asked to take the hemlock.

Despite all the denials, it will be interesting to see what GR does. Having had a couple attempts at the top job there might still be an inkling for the top job. Parker and Jackson were very vague when asked if they were interested rather than a flat out denial. Not a lot of talent to pick from.
 
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
He's history. You could tell by the body language and facial expressions after that caucus meeting that the punters weren't a happy group. My take is he had to stay as no one else wanted the chalice just yet but the waters are murky.

He's probably got 3 months of grace until the issue needs to be resolved but I expect it may not take that long and he will fall on his sword (with a push) or get asked to take the hemlock.

Despite all the denials, it will be interesting to see what GR does. Having had a couple attempts at the top job there might still be an inkling for the top job. Parker and Jackson were very vague when asked if they were interested rather than a flat out denial. Not a lot of talent to pick from.
Robertson would be only one I would see there being merit in but the cupboard is fairly bare. Parker was never going to support Hipkins for each of their personal stance on a wealth tax. If I had to make the decision Iā€™d give chippy some time to chip away at it. If national arenā€™t able to meet their election promises, for which Hipkins was constantly sceptical, he can go to town and express the concerns he had going into the election.
 
He's history. You could tell by the body language and facial expressions after that caucus meeting that the punters weren't a happy group. My take is he had to stay as no one else wanted the chalice just yet but the waters are murky.

He's probably got 3 months of grace until the issue needs to be resolved but I expect it may not take that long and he will fall on his sword (with a push) or get asked to take the hemlock.

Despite all the denials, it will be interesting to see what GR does. Having had a couple attempts at the top job there might still be an inkling for the top job. Parker and Jackson were very vague when asked if they were interested rather than a flat out denial. Not a lot of talent to pick from.
Probably better for Labour to present a united front (which looks like its tough for them to do) and keep Hipkins in the role for the next 6 - 12 months. Let the party get some concrete plans in place to rebuild and allow the new leader, whoever that may be, have a good two years working up to the next election.
 
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Robertson would be only one I would see there being merit in but the cupboard is fairly bare. Parker was never going to support Hipkins for each of their personal stance on a wealth tax. If I had to make the decision Iā€™d give chippy some time to chip away at it. If national arenā€™t able to meet their election promises, for which Hipkins was constantly sceptical, he can go to town and express the concerns he had going into the election.
I think Hipkins is pretty good in the house and will be good in opposition in that role.
I have a feeling having bigger Green and Maori caucus will also be good thing in opposition - A lot of the Labour list were pretty mediocre at best.
 
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Please don't send Bruce down that rabbit hole ;)
Ooh, my dicky ticker! - Monsieur Alfonse ('Allo 'Allo Quotes)
 
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
I donā€™t think many feel like being Christian disqualifies Luxon but some concerns for people I think are beliefs that are held and whether they be put into practice. Going into the final debate and polled there was 43% for Hipkins and 33% for Luxon in regards to trust, I donā€™t think much of that 33% for Luxon was due to his Christianity but more for his unwillingness to provide a clear answer on how some policies will be reached despite many being of the view they are unachievable. I think in a majority of the peopleā€™s minds when you are comparing to the previous PMs you mentioned, it came down to the individual and the level of trust the public displayed for them to put their vision into practice. Iā€™m not completely comprehensive of the Maori seats and how they come to the outcomes they do, but feel like they are there in a sense for the representation that the Aboriginal people were seeking for their voice referendum to have Aboriginal representation in parliament.
Sup42 had an interesting take on the Maori seats and I actually could see his point.
 
He's history. You could tell by the body language and facial expressions after that caucus meeting that the punters weren't a happy group. My take is he had to stay as no one else wanted the chalice just yet but the waters are murky.
I donā€™t know if they can remove Hipkins at present. The MPā€™s there could change in 3 weeks when the final vote is confirmed so I donā€™t know if the MPs actually have the moral authority to make significant changes just yet. Just like National canā€™t form a coalition until the numbers are official.

Like he said heā€™s the leader until heā€™s not.

I think he will be good in opposition and wouldnā€™t be against him leading them to the next election. I think without the Jacinda/ lockdown/ failed implementation baggage he will be good, but I also think a loss will lead to calls for a fresh start.
 
Back
Top