Random Politics

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by Savage

Of course you don't.

You really know how to get answers out of someone who has no obligation to provide them.

[Savage]

Well, I thought I was explaining myself quite clearly. Upon review of my post, I don't see how you could get confused.

Oh well.

[Lightspeed]

Perhaps I don't share your assumptions? I'm sorry I tried to genuinely engage in this discussion with you though, you're just pulling your typical schizoid "I'm genuinely curious/I want to catch you out" game.

[Ab]

Low population density in the CBD, slower expansion of Auckland into farmland, affordable housing. Pick two.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Perhaps I don't share your assumptions? I'm sorry I tried to genuinely engage in this discussion with you though, you're just pulling your typical schizoid "I'm genuinely curious/I want to catch you out" game.

Yeah, I have difficulty seeing things from your POV most times when it comes to this stuff. I tend to edit and re-word my posts quite a lot, but inevitably, my loathing towards you ends up coming through regardless.

I'd apologise, but I'm not really sorry at all =/

For once I was actually trying to see if you had any kind of valid explanation for what (on the surface) sounds plain fucking stupid, but you've curled up in a little ball sucking your thumb because the big mean internet guy is picking on you.

[Ab]

Group hug?

[CCS]

Standard lolspeed stuff.

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by Savage

Yeah, I have difficulty seeing things from your POV most times when it comes to this stuff. I tend to edit and re-word my posts quite a lot, but inevitably, my loathing towards you ends up coming through regardless.

I'd apologise, but I'm not really sorry at all =/

For once I was actually trying to see if you had any kind of valid explanation for what (on the surface) sounds plain fucking stupid, but you've curled up in a little ball sucking your thumb because the big mean internet guy is picking on you.

Yeah, you can't really expect to engage productively with challenging material like politics if you can't help but be a cock. You do need the capacity to put emotion to the side and try to understand what is being said without bias or preconceptions.

[Savage]

Thanks for the enlightenment Jezza.

[CCS]

Hey man, you gave it the old college try. No-one can blame you for that.

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by Savage

Thanks for the enlightenment Jezza.

Yeah, thanks for being a cunt, that's real big of you.

[fixed_truth]

I've never been in a 20sqm apartment before but it doesn't really sound like a family-friendly environment..?

[Spoon1]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

I've never been in a 20sqm apartment before but it doesn't really sound like a family-friendly environment..?

It's ok, the kids can hang out on the streets...

[CCS]

I don't think they're intended for families of 8 boongas.

[fixed_truth]

I know that tenancy agreements can have restrictions around the number of people living at a property but I'm not sure what goes with your own apartment.

[CCS]

I can confirm that there are no boongas in my house.

[adonis]

Originally Posted by CCS

Standard lolspeed stuff.

He's being asked loaded questions, fobbing them off is totally appropriate.

There are now (and always will be) those who, for one reason or another, cannot earn beyond a certain income. Whether that be of their own volition or not, I don't think we can change that without moving towards a communist state.

Just fuck off, really, go back to the 80's. This kind of simplistic bullshit is pathetic.

[CCS]

Originally Posted by adonis

He's being asked loaded questions, fobbing them off is totally appropriate.

Lolspeed can't give a straight answer no matter how you ask the question. I've tried. He is just too intellectually dishonest to have a sensible discussion with. That's why I prefer to skip the bullshit and go straight to the heckling.

[Golden Teapot]

Very small steps that barely count as being called incremental are needed to eventually achieve a coherent conversation with ls; years ago I decided that it's just not worth my effort to even attempt to do this. It will take what will seem like ten pages of twaddle to achieve what everyone else can do in one post.

[Savage]

Originally Posted by adonis

Just fuck off, really, go back to the 80's. This kind of simplistic bullshit is pathetic.

I'm sorry reality hurts your fragile sensitivities so much

Assuming you're in bed with lolspeed on this, how would you go about decreasing the number of low income earners? Maybe I misunderstood what he was trying to get to - do you have a better way of phrasing what he was trying to say? The claim at hand (which I may or may not have misunderstood) is that a better short term fix is to decrease the number of low income earners, rather than approve the building of smaller, more affordable apartments on the city fringes. Is that incorrect? Have I missed something? Do we just give everyone govt funded pay rises?

What other fixes are there for people who want/need to live close to the city but can't afford standard sized apartments? You seem to think I'm against helping the people who need help; that is not the case at all. Just because lolspeed can't handle fairly common NZG vitriol and runs away and refuses to engage in the thread any more, doesn't mean I didn't actually want to know what other options he seriously thinks would work in the short term.

You're welcome to rant and rave and carry on as much as you like - that still doesn't enlighten any one or provide any other options that you think would actually work as an alternative to cheaper, smaller apartments.

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by Savage

You're welcome to rant and rave and carry on as much as you like - that still doesn't enlighten any one or provide any other options that you think would actually work as an alternative to cheaper, smaller apartments.

You might want to check again to see who is doing the ranting and raving...

[Ab]

In the Darren Hughes meltdown thread I gave a bottom-of-the-weetbix-box analysis of why Labour is so fucked.

A much longer and much more detailed guest post at Kiwiblog arrives at exactly the same conclusion, although from a different angle. It's a good read.

http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/04/gu...cament _.html

[madmaxii]

Originally Posted by Ab

In the Darren Hughes meltdown thread I gave a bottom-of-the-weetbix-box analysis of why Labour is so fucked.

A much longer and much more detailed guest post at Kiwiblog arrives at exactly the same conclusion, although from a different angle. It's a good read.

http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/04/gu...cament _.html

This for TLDR:
The left of the party waged a war so total and absolute to purge the party of that instinct that it has destroyed modern Labour and left it a shrunken left leaning shell of its former self that struggles to attract electable talent, will not rejuvenate its caucus, offers policies that excite only 25% of the country and fights with the Greens (who are seen as more pure and virginal) for the centre left vote. The harder left base are tone deaf to the electoral realities of New Zealand politics believing that they will win the day if the great unwashed knew what was good for them and if the policies of the left were articulated better. Without a major change of direction, Labour’s prescription is a recipe for long term electoral oblivion!

[adonis]

Originally Posted by Savage

I'm sorry reality hurts your fragile sensitivities so much

I was insulting your intelligence, fuckwad. If you actually want to discuss shit in the future you might want to throw that better-dead-than-red attitude out. There ain't no reason any reasonable person would waste time engaging with your bullshit after that remark.

[fixed_truth]

lol sounds like some old fourth Labour rogenomics fan turned Act supporter!

Anyway counter analysis:

[CCS]

Originally Posted by madmaxii

This for TLDR:
The harder left base are tone deaf to the electoral realities of New Zealand politics believing that they will win the day if the great unwashed knew what was good for them and if the policies of the left were articulated better. Without a major change of direction, Labour’s prescription is a recipe for long term electoral oblivion!

Hmmm.

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

Anyway counter analysis:

As Colin James said in March this year, when he’s at his best, David Cunliffe is better than John Key.

This plays in to the first part I put in bold. This guy really thinks that Cunliffe is better than Key (but only on a good day, mind) and that the rest of the country just need to realise that. Well, Key keeps thrashing Cunliffe on the preferred PM polls. Whatever Colin James and this other fella see in Cunliffe that makes him so great, the rest of the electorate doesn't see it. The left need to pull their heads out of their arses and realise that Cunliffe is deeply unpopular and they need to work on that. Whining "but Cunliffe is beetttteeerrrr!" is not a viable strategy.

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

Anyway counter analysis:

I am not yet convinced that the media team there are coherent, for example.

This goes to the second part, that policies just need to be better communicated. No, it's nothing to do with the media team communicating the policies more coherently. The policies are fucking stupid. The anti-truck/pro-caravan policy is moronic. No amount of spin will make it a good policy. Drop it and come up with something good.

[fixed_truth]

Originally Posted by CCS

This plays in to the first part I put in bold. This guy really thinks that Cunliffe is better than Key (but only on a good day, mind) and that the rest of the country just need to realise that. Well, Key keeps thrashing Cunliffe on the preferred PM polls. Whatever Colin James and this other fella see in Cunliffe that makes him so great, the rest of the electorate doesn't see it. The left need to pull their heads out of their arses and realise that Cunliffe is deeply unpopular and they need to work on that. Whining "but Cunliffe is beetttteeerrrr!" is not a viable strategy.

Actually the context of that Colin James phrase is to do with the potential of Cunliffe to in the space of year go from a relative unknown to beating Key. Of course if you’re measuring who’s better by how popular they are Key will come out on top.

At a first meeting Cunliffe has attractive charm: intelligent, personable and not bad with the gab. Many will meet him for the first time in the first leaders debate and elsewhere on the campaign trail. That could make up some percentage points. Add in 1 or 2 per cent from a campaign targeted at 2008 and 2011 non-voters. At his best, Cunliffe could get Labour-Greens there.
But note that “at his best”. For most of his six months so far Cunliffe has not been at the sort of best required of a modern leader. If the next six months are no better and he condemns Labour to “nine long years” in opposition, he is unlikely to be leader for long after September.

http://www.colinjames.co.nz/david-cu...hip-challenge/

[CCS]

Yeah, that opinion piece is not really singing Cunliffe's praises, is it?

The one word that sums up the article:

if

[fixed_truth]

Yep. And even if Cunliffe is at his best and they stick to plugging their main policies ie. housing, beststart, power, manufacturing etc (so avoid the obscure unnecessary distraction type policy) - it still looks like at best they'll still need to give Winston one hell of a blowie.

[Ab]

Labour, focused on the big issues

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11241501

[StN]

The rainbow boys don't like big boobies.

[Ab]

It's the end times, I agree with Bomber Bradbury:

http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/27...ganised-crime/

[Juju]

So the guy who wants to run our economy, has no idea where our economy is at right now.

[spigalau]

Originally Posted by Juju

So the guy who wants to run our economy, has no idea where our economy is at right now.

You misheard him, he said 'ruin' not 'run'...

[Ab]

Originally Posted by Juju

So the guy who wants to run our economy, has no idea where our economy is at right now.

Yeah nah that's a pretty epic level of fail right there.

[BoyWonder]

He's got away with it though, either because no one was even watching it to begin with (except Steven Joyce), or this level of stupidity from Labour is no longer newsworthy.

[Lightspeed]

Well in the unlikely scenario they make it to parliament hopefully the party will have access to people who do know this kind of stuff that aren't into the whole "Hey, I'm an expert in economics, you know what I'm up for? A whole bunch of bullshit public scrutiny and petty schoolyard-style bickering with grown ups."

[Ab]

Originally Posted by BoyWonder

He's got away with it though, either because no one was even watching it to begin with (except Steven Joyce), or this level of stupidity from Labour is no longer newsworthy.

I think it's option 2. Nobody gives a shit what Labour says about the economy.

[fixed_truth]

Mr Joyce claimed nine mistakes in David Parker's interview. None stacked up.

All we need now is someone to fact check the fact check of a fact check (taking into account interpretations of statements of course!)

[Juju]

Lies, damned lies etc etc.