Labour open to partnership with Winston if it gets them government

Ab · 14th November 2011, 16:04

Quote:

Labour's not ruling out cutting a post election deal with Winston Peters and New Zealand First.

Phil Goff's made the admission to Mike Hosking during Newstalk ZB's leader's breakfast broadcast this morning.

"Look, we'll have a look at what the election throws up and who we need to talk to," he says.

Asked if he did need to talk to Mr Peters, would he, Mr Goff replied "I haven't ruled that out."

And there you have it ladies and gentlemen of the electorate, a vote for Labour is a vote for Winston.

CCS · 14th November 2011, 16:04

xor · 14th November 2011, 16:07

Oh dear

fixed_truth · 14th November 2011, 18:10

I can't stand Winston (I won't work with anyone anyway) Peters and would prefer if he wasn't there.

But policy wise, to me it's still more appealing than a vote for National is a vote for Brash, Banks et al.

aR Que · 14th November 2011, 18:15

I'd take brash and his faggoty little mouth over winston any day, why? Because brash knows no one likes him.

Ab · 14th November 2011, 18:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by fixed_truth

I can't stand Winston (I won't work with anyone anyway) Peters and would prefer if he wasn't there.

But policy wise, to me it's still more appealing than a vote for National is a vote for Brash, Banks et al.

Not necessarily, enough votes for National and they don't need a partner.

Labour can ONLY get into power by bringing Winston in too.

fixed_truth · 14th November 2011, 18:37

Ab · 14th November 2011, 18:40

I'd rather have Banks in Cabinet than Peters. I'd rather have Sue Bradford than Peters.

adonis · 14th November 2011, 19:16

He wasn't such a bad foreign minister tbh *ducks* Actually his contribution to governing was probably more agreeable than say... Rodney Hide. He's a blowhard who I disagree with 99% of the time but he's mostly harmless when he gets to the levers of power.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aR Que

I'd take brash and his faggoty little mouth over winston any day, why? Because brash knows no one likes him.

It's the other way around. Brash thought taking over Act would be enough to take them to 10%.

Lightspeed · 15th November 2011, 00:23

The correct response from Goff would be something like "Look, if I am left with the options of a National led government or making a deal with Winston Peters, I am going to be in a very difficult position."

14th November 2011, 16:04	#2
CCS Stunt Pants	eww __________________ I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner?

14th November 2011, 18:10	#4
fixed_truth	I can't stand Winston (I won't work with anyone anyway) Peters and would prefer if he wasn't there. But policy wise, to me it's still more appealing than a vote for National is a vote for Brash, Banks et al. __________________ Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong.

14th November 2011, 18:15	#5
aR Que	I'd take brash and his faggoty little mouth over winston any day, why? Because brash knows no one likes him.

14th November 2011, 18:37	#7
fixed_truth	__________________ Protecting your peace is way more important than proving your point. Some people aren't open to cultivating their views. Just let them be wrong.

14th November 2011, 18:40	#8
Ab A mariachi ogre snorkel	I'd rather have Banks in Cabinet than Peters. I'd rather have Sue Bradford than Peters.

15th November 2011, 00:23	#10
Lightspeed	The correct response from Goff would be something like "Look, if I am left with the options of a National led government or making a deal with Winston Peters, I am going to be in a very difficult position." __________________ Stay shook. No sook.