election called for Nov 26, Key rules out Winston First deal

[Ab]

Kiwis will head to the polls on November 26, Prime Minister John Key announced this afternoon.

Key also said he had ruled out a coalition with Winston Peters and NZ First, saying there was no place for Peters in a National-led government.

[CCS]

Haha, I love that! And the best thing is that you know he actually means it, which is rare coming from a poli.

[A Corpse]

Will be interesting to see how Labour talk about (or rather, avoid talking about) the possibility of working with the Harawira party.

[Draco T Bastard]

Originally Posted by CCS

Haha, I love that! And the best thing is that you know he actually means it, which is rare coming from a poli.

http://thestandard.org.nz/key-press-...comment-294206

He has phrased that carefully. “A Winston Peters-led NZ First …” “no place in my government …” (but confidence and supply?)

Plenty of ‘outs’ there, and he’ll find one if he needs it. See numerous previous “commitments” (GST etc).

He means what he says - he just doesn't want you to know what he said.

[CCS]

Lol, CONSPIRACIES!

He didn't want Winston last time, he won't want him this time. Do you honestly think there's any chance at all that he would do a supply and confidence deal with Winston, knowing he'd have to deal with the guy?

[chubby]

^^
you're deluded.
john (and national) will work with whomsoever they need to to form a government.

[cyc]

Much as I've been disgusted by National's performance, the clear statement that he won't work with that fuckwit Winston means National gets my vote in this year's election. Goff + Winston in government is just a suicide-inducing thought.

[SickBo@Work]

Yeah Key is clearly getting desperate and coming out with false statements like this to try and boost his sagging popularity and avert certain defeat at the next election......

[fixed_truth]

Imo Peters is no worse than Hyde, Garrett, Wong etc etc

[chubby]

Originally Posted by SickBo@Work

Yeah Key is clearly getting desperate and coming out with false statements like this to try and boost his sagging popularity and avert certain defeat at the next election......

yeah,yeah.get yourself out of the 'good old' FPP days-
this election could be a resounding result for MMP.

[Golden Teapot]

Here we go: https://www.ipredict.co.nz/app.php?d....2011.NATIONAL.

Lefties should go short today and dream of their windfall.

[doppelgänger of someone]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

Imo Peters is no worse than Hyde, Garrett, Wong etc etc

[Lightspeed]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

Imo Peters is no worse than Hyde, Garrett, Wong etc etc

Peters might be the same as Hyde and Wong, but Garrett? C'mon man, Peters ain't that bad.

[cyc]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

Imo Peters is no worse than Hyde, Garrett, Wong etc etc

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHHAAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHhAHAHAHAHAHHA

Fuck off. Just because Winston might be the only hope for your bum boy Goff to get NEAR power, it doesn't mean the reality distortion field affects everyone else. Garrett is a fucking dick and no one is at his level but whatever you think of Rodney Hyde and his policies, his level of hypocrisy doesn't stretch anywhere near Peters'. Winston Peters is a hypocrite extraordinarie who panders to the xenophobia and selfishness of the grey power to rob the younger generation left, right and centre just to stay in power. I'll let Ab have the last word:

Originally Posted by Ab

Winston is an amoral demagogue. He's a former captain of the Auckland Maori rugby team (a race-based selection), a former NZ Maori rugby player (a race-based selection), former candidate for the seat of Northern Maori (a race-based electorate), a former Minister of Maori Affairs (a race-based position), and he held the balance of power after the 1996 election because, among other things, NZ First's Maori-friendly policies and candidates won it all four Maori seats.

Winston Peters only fucking EXISTS because of special rights. It's just that he has identified that he can most effectively get his snout back in the taxpayer-funded trough in the 21st century by appealing to elderly white racists. So now he's 'sick of the "we want equal rights by having special rights" cry'.

Anyone who believes anything Winston Peters says or does is a fucking idiot. Fortunately for Winston and unfortunately for the country there are lots of fucking idiots out there.

Add Fixed_truth to the list of idiots.

[CCS]

Originally Posted by chubby

^^
you're deluded.
john (and national) will work with whomsoever they need to to form a government.

Haha, you want to believe that so badly that it's just pathetic. John Key said last time that he wouldn't work with Peters and he didn't. He said he won't work with Peters this election and he won't.

[fixed_truth]

Cyc, your lines of HAHA are quite impressive, but perhaps you should take a deep breath and count to ten before posting.

I'm not defending Peters, I dislike him immensely and would like it if he was gone. My "no worse" comparison was not specifically about his character but the practical application of NZ First in Govt.

Also Goff is about as much my "bum boy" as Key is yours.

[Juice]

Originally Posted by CCS

Haha, you want to believe that so badly that it's just pathetic. John Key said last time that he wouldn't work with Peters and he didn't. He said he won't work with Peters this election and he won't.

To be fair he never got the chance as Peters missed the cut entirely.

[Pimp-X]

There is no other viable party than National. Goff is ensuring that.

[fixed_truth]

Originally Posted by Juice

To be fair he never got the chance as Peters missed the cut entirely.

And let's remember it wasn't something that he ruled out immediately on principle. I don't think he will now that he's said he wont, but I think if he wasn't doing so well in the polls he wouldn't have made the call.

If he formally announces I'll make a call on behalf of the National Party whether we want to countenance any potential relationship with NZ First

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10663189

[chubby]

Originally Posted by Juice

To be fair he never got the chance as Peters missed the cut entirely.

and three months later key said 'the door is still open' as a way of pointing out that he was a pragmatic leader who would do 'whatever it took' to provide stability.

get off the ganga ccs- your short term memory is turning to shit.

[CCS]

whatevs

[Bent]

Originally Posted by CCS

Haha, you want to believe that so badly that it's just pathetic. John Key said last time that he wouldn't work with Peters and he didn't. He said he won't work with Peters this election and he won't.

Yes, sample sizes of one make for great statistics.

There is always an excuse despite what was promised. The benefits of forming a coalition will be weighed up against the political value of being able to say "I told you so" after the fact.

What it boils down to is that you really can't trust anything that comes out of a politician's mouth about an election that's most of a year away.

[Golden Teapot]

NZ First and National will never go together whilst Peters is at their helm. And given there is no party without him it means they will never go together.

Having NZ First in parliament though is a problem for National since under a unlikely melt-down scenario NZ First could form a government by using labor as a coalition partner (sure labor would claim the top seat but since goff is only a puppet it would be Peters running the show).

NZ First voters are miserable old selfish rednecks in the main - they otherwise live in the National and labor camps as marginalised factions that have little voice of their own (as should be the case). So long as the National rednecks know there is no chance NZ First will come to anything they will likely continue to vote for National and this will ensure that NZ First is kept where they should be - as a painful memory of the stupidity of the past.

labor and the more extreme left assume that any coalition is a possibility because they're used to labor acting in that manner. labor did and will do what ever it takes to ruin the prospects of NZ - if they need a self-serving xenophobic hater of the young then they'll open their kimono, lay down and and dream of peasants plowing the land whilst Peters enjoys himself.

[CCS]

WB, GT.

[Juju]

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

Labor did and will do what ever it takes to ruin the prospects of NZ - if they need a self-serving xenophobic hater of the young then they'll open their kimono, lay down and and dream of peasants plowing the land whilst Peters enjoys himself.

So eloquent.

[Saladin]

Too right GT, I'll never vote for a party that has jumped into bed with Peters. National all the way!

[Bent]

Originally Posted by Golden Teapot

labor did and will do what ever it takes to ruin the prospects of NZ

I'm not a Labour voter, but that's a stupid thing to say. Who's the conspiracy theorist now?

I still say that 10 months is too long in politics to rule out coalitions between either of the center parties and pretty much any of the other parties.

[fidgit]

I really can't see Labour + anyone winning the next election, regardless of what National do at this point.

You can't beat the fact that John The Smiling Mascot is by far the most popular leader with the tv-watching, tui drinking lower-middle class that makes up most of the country.

Anyone with name-recognition in the Green's has died or quit, the Maori party is probably going to splinter into lots of little seats that will refuse to work with anyone on principle, Jim's retiring (pretty sure he said he would anyway), Dunne's only one seat, and if ACT get back in, I'll go and buy a hat, and eat it.

Labour's hopes riding on a guy with the charisma of my soggy weatbix leftovers, touting policies that are demonstrably stupid, means anyone with two brain cells to rub together isn't going to vote for them, and there's no one left to vote against National.


I look forward to a strong showing for the "and Ben" party in November. (or is it "Bill and" now? I can never remember.)

[fixed_truth]

I think that you're over-simplifying NZ's political situation.

47% of voters don't want a National led Govt.
http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2011/4625/

You're right people don't particularly like Goff but they also don't like that the Govt. have pretty much failed to achieve what they campaigned on. For example putting measures in place to ensure we "race out of recession". recession anyone?. Unemployment is up again. Workers wages have lowered in real terms and we haven't seen the "north of $50/week" tax cuts. (btw I'm not arguing that NZ's economy isn't largely influenced by the global economy; just that Key hasn't delivered on what he told NZ). Also closing the wage gap with Aussie anybody? "Ultra-fast broadband"? "cycleway"? Not raising GST? Car crushing? Further (and most significantly) people don't want our SOE's sold and they don't like that ECE has been slashed.

Yeah Key's public image destroys Goff's and yes National party vote is a good 20% higher than Labour - but this doesn't mean that National aren't going to have to work hard this year.

Ps - Act just need Rodney to win his seat to get in, what flavour hat do you like?

[Juju]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

"Ultra-fast broadband"?

You mean the fibre rollout? That is well underway. Perhaps not the actual digging and laying, but tenders and all the boring legal background stuff has been making leaps and bounds.

[doppelgänger of someone]

Originally Posted by fidgit

I look forward to a strong showing for the "and Ben" party in November. (or is it "Bill and" now? I can never remember.)

I think NZG should start a Lemon Party, or a NZ branch. I'm all for trolling incompetent politicians and unsuspecting voters.

[Golden Teapot]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

I think that you're over-simplifying NZ's political situation.

47% of voters don't want a National led Govt.

You probably need to trim between 5% and 10% off of that number to allow for the bias you are introducing by trying to answer a quite different question from any the survey can validly answer.

[fidgit]

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

I think that you're over-simplifying NZ's political situation.

47% of voters don't want a National led Govt.
http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2011/4625/

You're right people don't particularly like Goff but they also don't like that the Govt. have pretty much failed to achieve what they campaigned on. For example putting measures in place to ensure we "race out of recession". recession anyone?. Unemployment is up again. Workers wages have lowered in real terms and we haven't seen the "north of $50/week" tax cuts. (btw I'm not arguing that NZ's economy isn't largely influenced by the global economy; just that Key hasn't delivered on what he told NZ). Also closing the wage gap with Aussie anybody? "Ultra-fast broadband"? "cycleway"? Not raising GST? Car crushing? Further (and most significantly) people don't want our SOE's sold and they don't like that ECE has been slashed.

Yeah Key's public image destroys Goff's and yes National party vote is a good 20% higher than Labour - but this doesn't mean that National aren't going to have to work hard this year.

Ps - Act just need Rodney to win his seat to get in, what flavour hat do you like?

All good points, and not ones I can dispute. However, I think you're attributing way too much facility to realise National didn't deliver, to your middle of the road voter. Based on what's happened historically, I'd wager a lot of 'cross over' voters from last time have forgotten why they voted for National, and will only be interested in what they promise this time round.


(I really hope Rodney doesn't win, based on his hillarious performance/hipocracy in the past term. I just realised I'm doing that "attributing too much capacity for thought" thing I just said in the first paragraph.

Straw hats are still hats....)

[fixed_truth]

Originally Posted by Juju

You mean the fibre rollout? That is well underway. Perhaps not the actual digging and laying, but tenders and all the boring legal background stuff has been making leaps and bounds.

It's my understanding that after over two years the tenders still haven't been decided. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10700759

Negotiations are under way to decide who will build the Government's fibre network

Originally Posted by fidgit

Based on what's happened historically, I'd wager a lot of 'cross over' voters from last time have forgotten why they voted for National, and will only be interested in what they promise this time round.

Yeah it is hard to say exactly what actions of the Govt. actually resonate with these swing voters. The "promises" and stuff-ups from both sides leading up to November will be most significant to this group. Hell, it's a bit sad but the result of the RWC could decide the next Govt! C'mon All Blacks . . . Oh wait

[JP]

National will get in and gut what they can, whether they will be able to offer enough short term bribes to get a 3rd term will be the interesting thing. Going from how America currently functions, i'm going to say yes unless Labour offers some even better short term bribes. Yay politics.

Here's looking forward to the gradual privitisation of our health care and other vital services!

This ain't the fucking 80s, how much more evidence do people need than in most cases privatization is a rip off? Especially when the companies are currently PROFITABLE and likely to get more so in the case of energy providers (energy crisis coming up, no coincidence they're getting sold now).

[Golden Teapot]

Originally Posted by JP

Especially when the companies are currently PROFITABLE and ...

Well that's accounting-profit i.e. the profit used to determine how much tax to pay and so forth.

If you want to really measure what's going on from a government-ownership perspective then you'd need to introduce a charge to the profit-and-loss to represent the opportunity-cost of the government holding capital in each of these entities. If you did this then you'll be in loss making territory in almost every case.

And, if you also introduce a charge to achieve equity between the generation of tax payers that bought the assets and later generations free-riding off of the benefits you'd be seriously into loss making territory.

If a government wants more income from an over-performing sector of the economy then it can simply increase tax in that area; case in point is what the australian's are doing for mining.

The left argument around asset ownership always neglects to take account of all costs of ownership. This makes sense for the left since the purchases of assets are always funded by people who never vote for them. So steal from the "rich" of one generation and squander on the beneficiaries of the next.

[JP]

I'm genuinely interested in being correct, so when I started reading your reply GT I was pleased. Not that I'm taking that anecdotal argument as gospel or something, but it's good to get more information on why privitisation is supposed to be a positive.

Then this happened

'The left argument around asset ownership always neglects to take account of all costs of ownership. This makes sense for the left since the purchases of assets are always funded by people who never vote for them. So steal from the "rich" of one generation and squander on the beneficiaries of the next.'

Why? Why do people have to be like this? I don't care about 'stealing' from people who can just as arbitrarily be said to be 'stealing' from everyone else. I mean nigga please, 'the working class' is called that exactly for a reason, don't call them beneficiaries when they create all the wealth they're apparently 'stealing'. That's just partisan bullshit. It will only turn off people you should be convincing, or get nods from people who agree with a partisan point. Same as if I started ranting about how John Key just wants to sell of NZ to his mates at bargain prices (cough did happen last time National was in but i'm ignoring that).

What I care about is approaching problems with an attitude of finding the best overall result for society. I am so sick of the imaginary 'left and right', the left isn't particularly left and no one seems to be acting that genuinely.

If all we're going on is anecdotes I have one for you, America. Not only has privitisation provided higher costs for lower service in almost all areas, but as the health care debate showed, it also wrecks dialogue for the future with regards to vital services for the entire country.

It was good seeing your arguments, but as far as I can see you're throwing around arbitrary costs when the companies still factually pay dividends and are likely to pay more in future.

If you want to really measure what's going on from a government-ownership perspective then you'd need to introduce a charge to the profit-and-loss to represent the opportunity-cost of the government holding capital in each of these entities. If you did this then you'll be in loss making territory in almost every case.

Can you explain this further?

[Cynos]

Originally Posted by CCS

Lol, CONSPIRACIES!

He didn't want Winston last time, he won't want him this time. Do you honestly think there's any chance at all that he would do a supply and confidence deal with Winston, knowing he'd have to deal with the guy?

I fail to see how Winston could be worse than the Maori Party / ACT.

[CCS]

True, but I think a lot of it lies in how John Key feels he can have a working relationship with them and how likely they are to try to hold the country to ransom. *shrug* Time for Winston to gtfo, imo. Is he hanging on for some kind of retirement perks or something? Fucker never did pay back that money.

[Lightspeed]

Oooh, Peter Dunne is trying to get himself a few votes for the coming election.

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/newsdeta...storyid=190362

I assume "Kiwis" is another way of saying "non-Maori New Zealanders" in Dunne's vocabulary.