Much Worse Than It Looks

108
8236

THE REID RESEARCH POLL is much worse than it looks. Twelve months from now, when the actual voting papers, as opposed to responses to pollsters’ questions, are counted, Labour’s tally is likely to be much lower than 32 percent. Why? Because the level of voter abstention will be higher than it has been for many elections. Higher than the pollsters at Reid Research and other agencies are willing to assume, which means that the pre-election polls will flatter the Left by a significant margin. When the true level of abstention is revealed on Election Night – especially in relation to Māori, Pasifika and Pakeha voters under 30 – the vicious destruction of the Labour Party by older, whiter and righter voters will be explained.

The flight to abstention in 2023 will reflect a turning away from politics that is likely to gather strength as Labour’s contentious legislation on Hate Speech, Three Waters and Co-Governance contributes to a political climate of unprecedented bitterness and strife. While the determination of right-wing New Zealanders to defeat the Labour Government will only be strengthened by Labour’s intransigence, the voters of the centre-left will feel increasingly uneasy about defending Jacinda Ardern’s government. As the political rancour grows, the inclination of “mainstream” voters to “sit this one out” will grow along with it.

Certainly, the overseas experience – especially in the United States – confirms that the nastier politics gets, the stronger the temptation felt by moderate voters to simply walk away from the whole business. The Right’s supporters, by contrast, are energised by their political opponents’ escalations, and typically respond with even more outrageous escalations of their own. The fear inspired by these tactics is even less conducive to normal political engagement. Voters shut their doors against the unpleasantness and determine to have nothing to do with the extremists on both sides.

The dynamic was memorably captured by W.B. Yeats in his poem “The Second Coming”:

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

- Sponsor Promotion -

Are full of passionate intensity.

While Labour’s refusal to back away from its most controversial policies are mobilising right-wing voters against them, its all-too-evident failure to address the worsening problems associated with the cost of living, health, education, housing and criminal offending will be having the opposite effect on the voters in its heartland.

Among Labour’s “base”, expectations have been high that the changes promised by the party since 2017 will make their lives easier. That these changes – at least on the “transformational” scale suggested by the Prime Minister – have not eventuated, cannot help but contribute to a mood of disillusionment among “Jacinda’s” most loyal supporters. Indeed, according to the results of a survey commissioned by Stuff Media, fully 35 percent of those asked how the Prime Minister made them feel, responded by saying she made them feel “disappointed”.  A third replied “concerned”. More than a quarter said “angry”.

To make matters even more confusing, Labour has not spent the last five years attempting to re-define itself in the manner of the Fourth Labour Government. In fact, it has done the opposite, taking every opportunity to distance itself from “Rogernomics” and reaffirm its admiration for the heroes of the Labour Movement, Michael Joseph Savage and Norman Kirk.

To older Labour supporters, this is quite simply baffling, and not a little irritating. Many of them lived through the government of Norman Kirk, and are well aware that Jacinda Ardern’s period in office – putting to one side the exogenous shocks of the Christchurch Mosque Massacre and the Covid-19 Pandemic – has been nothing like “Big Norm’s”.

Undeterred, the PM continues to insist that hers is a government in the finest Labour tradition. In her speech to her party’s conference on Sunday, 6 November 2022, she reiterated her government’s claim to the historical mantle of its predecessors:

“On the 9th floor of the Beehive building in Wellington, sitting directly behind my desk, is a picture of Michael Joseph Savage. You could say he’s on my shoulder but also ever so slightly in my ear. 

“Of course it was Savage and the first Labour Government that lifted New Zealand out of the depths of the Great Depression. Not by cutting taxes and services, but by investing in jobs, and building a social welfare safety net. They built the country’s first state home. And not long after these social reforms – New Zealand’s living standards were among some of the highest in the world. Not for the few, but for the many. 

“The Finance Minister who supported Savage, Walter Nash, then led Labour’s second government as it continued to build our nation’s social welfare system, while advocating on the world stage for peace over war after World War 2.

“It was Norman Kirk and a Labour government who tilted the country towards a modern future with reforms of trade, health, the arts, and education. They worked hard to foster a renewed national identity and partnership with Maōri – all the while challenging global evil such as apartheid and nuclear testing.

“It was a fight David Lange continued, making New Zealand nuclear free, while also righting the wrongs of the past by legalising homosexuality, and fully abolishing the death penalty.”

Virtually every claim made by the Prime Minister in the passage quoted above is either historically contestable, or just plain, flat-out, wrong. For that very reason, it is a powerful illustration of the deeply flawed thinking that has led the Ardern Government to the brink of electoral ruin.

At its heart is a cynical contempt for the truth, and a smug conviction that the falsehoods scattered through it will not be noticed by anybody whose opinion matters. Labour’s leaders have been able to get away with this sort of rhetorical flim-flam since 2017 because the intervention of the unpredictable – Christchurch, Covid – helpfully distracted the country from its government’s moral vacuity. The longer the electorate has had to take stock of its government’s ethics, however, the less it has found to like.

It is certainly no accident, that on the issues that have so divided the nation – Hate Speech, Three Waters, Co-Governance – Jacinda Ardern and her ministers have been uncharacteristically tongue-tied. The redefinition of democracy which lies at the heart of all three proposals requires attributes this government simply does not possess. The intellectual ability to frame and present an argument. The straightforwardness needed to persuade even one’s own voters to accept it.

Small wonder New Zealanders feel disappointed, concerned, and angered by their Prime Minister. And, no wonder at all that, come Election Day, a very much larger number of them than usual will steadfastly decline to make their way to the nearest polling booth and cast a vote.

Yes, they will experience a pang of guilt as they watch their older, whiter, and righter neighbours set off to destroy the Sixth Labour Government.

But it will pass.

108 COMMENTS

  1. Yesterday in an interview with Ryan Bridge the PM said she was proud of her governments record on housing. Oh. My. God.! Proud of record prices? Record unaffordablity? Record amounts spent of public money on motels? Record homelessness as a result of her governments track record on housing?

    Nothing encapsulated the reason Labour is in decline, perhaps terminal decline, more than the delusional rainbows and unicorns state of our PM muddled thinking!

    • Dead right @ Antforce62
      @CT asks
      “Why? Because the level of voter *abstention will be higher than it has been for many elections. ”
      Let me define the word ‘abstention’ for the trump-esque natzo swing voters out there.
      *abstention
      /əbˈstɛnʃ(ə)n/
      noun: abstention; plural noun: abstentions
      1.
      an instance of declining to vote for or against a proposal or motion.
      “a resolution passed by 126 votes to none, with six abstentions”
      Similar:
      refusal to vote
      abstaining
      non-voting
      sitting on the fence
      2.restraint in one’s consumption; abstinence.
      “alcohol consumption versus abstention”
      Why is it, I wonder, that enrolling to vote is a legal requirement yet to actually vote isn’t?
      Voting must be compulsory.
      Sure, I understand that some people, including me, might find it difficult, if not almost impossible, to vote for any of the fools. I just vote for the lessor of two weevils. But surely, eventually, we’d get to a point where we’d get a different and more positive outcome. A natzo / act tumor wouldn’t be an outcome, it’d be a civil war.
      Read some of the comments here re trump. OMG.
      Rumble.
      https://rumble.com/v1q1vf2–watch-live-president-donald-j.-trump-holds-rally-in-miami-fl-11622.html
      Example:
      debrabrightforbes, 1 week ago
      My favorite president…..President Donald J Trump. We all know he won bigly.
      Expialidosious, 1 week ago
      President of the World will speak today!! I can’t wait!!

    • John Key authored the housing crisis – whether you or the righteous Mr Trotter believe it or not.

      • Labour turned it into a catastrophe.
        Amusing to note there has been a downturn in housing worldwide yet some people on this site think Jacinda Ardern did it.
        That’s so funny it’s hilarious.

        • Amusing there has been inflation globally and yet some people on this site(BTF) think Jacinda was responsible for N.Z.s rise.
          That’s so funny it’s hilarious. People have been put into psychiatric hospitals for less.

    • Actually it started with Key when he said at the start of his second term” we must not be arrogant”.

      • And as usual Sir John kept his word.
        As for “open and honest government” it was a slogan only never meant to be taken seriously. Like the broken promises which we are now told were aspirations only.
        Let’s be frank this Ardern Labour Government is a failure,they must go.

  2. The PM is a true post-modernist in her thinking – there is nothing absolutely true, it is all interpretation and competing narratives being created. And her narrative is just as valid as any other narrative or explanation.

    Also, her pride is an emotion she feels strongly so it must have huge explanatory power, just like her good intentions and hopes excuse a lot of failures.

    • Interesting. Watching her in operation, I have come to think she is a bit of a control freak – confusing stubbornness with being staunch (“stay the course” even when the facts change).
      It’s probably quite an attractive trait amongst some of her colleagues – it means they never have to admit they might have been wrong, and less of a need to have the PR bullshit and spin merchants dream up excuses.
      Sepuloni is a bit the same, combined with a bit of a mean streak

      • All of that about Jacinda, but that does not absolve her colleagues, every one of whom has to take the same responsibility – is there only one -David Parker – who will ever express a contrary opinion? Jacinda is wrong – they are cowards.

        • I’m sorry, that’s an operational matter, however in the meantime I’ll consult my officials and get back to you.

        • “Would this [being a control freak] be considered an admirable trait for a man?”

          No not in the slightest. Admirable perhaps to people who tend to be enamoured with celebrity and demagoguery with no idea of what effective, enduring leadership and consensus building is.

        • “ Would this be considered an admirable trait for a man? “ No. It suggests rigidity of thought and a closed mind. Zealots can be like that, miss out on the possibility of learning from the hands they refuse to touch.

  3. Facebook
    Twitter
    PUBLIC POLICY / OPINION
    Jacinda Ardern is, indisputably, New Zealand’s foremost impresario of political verbiage, writes Chris Trotter

    7th Nov 22, 7:58am
    by Chris Trotter
    Jacinda Ardern at podiumJacinda Ardern
    By Chris Trotter*

    Phil Spector’s “Wall of Sound” production technique revolutionised the recording of popular music in the 1950s and 60s. Simple multiplication lay at the heart of Spector’s innovation. Where other producers would hire one musician, he would employ many. Three, not one, drummers. Two, not one, pianists. Multiple guitarists – acoustic and electric. All dedicated to enlarging his young listeners’ experience. The effect he was looking for – and delivered – was a two-minute symphony.

    Jacinda Ardern has perfected her own version of Phil Spector’s wall of sound. A multiplication, not of instruments, but of words. Verbal riffs and phrases that build upon one another to create an edifice of explanation that doesn’t so much enlarge as overwhelm those assigned to question the prime minister, as well as those inclined to listen to her. Among her peers there is no one who approaches the Prime Minister when it comes to talking the talk. She is, indisputably, New Zealand’s foremost impresario of political verbiage.

    To describe Ardern in these terms is not in any way to deprecate her. Increasingly, across the Western World, the quality most sought after by politicians – and admired by voters – is fluency. To be at a loss for words, in the current political climate, is a sure sign of weakness. What counts today is polish, style and ease. The ability to convince: not by the meaning of one’s words, but by how well one delivers them. In an age of celebrity, all that matters is the smoothness of the “talent’s” performance.

    Nowhere was this phenomenon more agonisingly on display than in the on-screen confrontation between the Democratic and Republican contenders for the open Pennsylvania Senate seat: John Fetterman and Dr Mehmet Oz.

    Prior to the debilitating stroke that hit Fetterman in the opening weeks of his campaign, he had been well-ahead of his rival. In spite of the fact that “Dr Oz” is a well-known television celebrity, he was unable to match Fetterman’s working-class “authenticity” – manifested principally through his rough-and-ready working-man’s vocabulary and diction.

    Robbed of this easy fluency, however, Fetterman soon began to flounder. His positive medical prognoses notwithstanding, Fetterman’s stroke-induced inarticulateness, when set alongside Oz’s smooth delivery, instantly began to tell against him in the polls. The voters did not appear to care about the candidates’ policies, or even about their characters. The only factor that seemed to count was who sounded most like the host of a reality TV show. Pennsylvania, which, six months ago, had been seen as a slam-dunk for the Democrats, is now too close to call.

    As New Zealand enters election year, a change of government may ultimately come to depend on how closely National’s Christopher Luxon can match the Prime Minister in political fluency. At the moment, Luxon is well behind Ardern. Plausible, rather than convincing, the National leader presents well enough under gentle questioning. Pressed to explain his words, however, Luxon’s fluency falters. Openly challenged by politicians or journalists with the facts at their fingertips, his fluency has an alarming tendency to disappear altogether. Unlike the PM, notorious for being formidably well-briefed, Luxon, under pressure, sounds neither convincing, nor reassuring.

    The contrast between Luxon and his health spokesman, Shane Reti, is instructive. Even more than Ardern, Reti presents an easy authority. On both the generalities and the details he is a hard man to fluster. That medicine is his profession undoubtedly helps, but so, too, does his ability to think on his feet.

    Questioned by John Campbell on Sunday’s Q+A, Reti turned his interviewer’s collection of official statements and reports into a formidable debating point – demanding to know why it was necessary to have so many bureaucracies dedicated to supplying more-or-less identical advice to the Government. That is the calibre of performance that wins a Leader’s Debate in the final weeks of an election campaign: the sort of “Show me the money!” improvisation that enabled John Key to defeat Labour three times in a row. Can Luxon think that fast? Not on current form.

    Luxon’s performance also falls short in another important respect: his ability to emote convincingly. On the “performative emotion” scale the National Party leader is positioned several rungs short of the Prime Minister. Sadly, Nature has not supplied him with the highly mobile features of Ardern, who can flash a dazzling smile of reassurance with the same ease that she adopts the pathos of a mourning Madonna, or demonstrates the empathic rictus of a woman who feels your pain. Luxon does cheery tolerably well, but all those other emotions, so critical to a successful political performance: anger, pity, disdain, lofty indifference, intense solidarity; still need a lot of work.

    Naturally, all of the above were on display at various points during Jacinda Ardern’s speech to the Labour Party’s annual conference (6/11/22). Unsurprisingly, there are few contexts in which the Labour leader feels more at home than in front of the party faithful. Given the amount of practice she has had, Ardern’s ease is only to be expected. Long before she became leader, “Jacinda” had made herself the darling of Labour’s membership. Her youth, her vivacity, and her ability to string together words that conveyed less in the way of deep meaning than they did of happy feeling, made her the ideal Mistress of Ceremonies at party gatherings.

    It is a testimony to just how much Ardern learned about the art of communication at the University of Waikato, that she has been able to parlay her talent as an MC into the skills of a PM. She grasped early what her predecessors – Phil Goff, David Shearer, David Cunliffe and Andrew Little – missed. That what people are looking for in a leader are exactly the same qualities they admire in a game-show host. Warmth, wit, and a complete absence of condescension, obviously. But, also unflappability: the quality of always appearing to be on top of things – even when they are going wrong.

    That unflappability, so evident in the hours and days following the Christchurch Mosque Massacre, White Island, and – most impressively – during the Covid-19 Pandemic, is what makes Ardern such a formidable political contender. That sense of being in control – without appearing to make any obvious effort – drives her political opponent’s crazy. John Key has it – albeit with a slightly different performative repertoire. Boris Johnson has it. And so, to the deep chagrin of millions, does Donald Trump.

    Phil Spector’s two-minute symphonies made his career. That wall of sound testifying to the unstoppable power of pop music. The other wall of sound, the one produced by men and women who can read an autocue without appearing to, points to another kind of power: the kind that reassures us that even in the midst of chaos – someone is still in charge. Small wonder, then, that the politicians capable of conveying a similar reassurance – without an autocue – tend to win more elections than they lose.

    *Chris Trotter has been writing and commenting professionally about New Zealand politics for more than 30 years. He writes a weekly column for interest.co.nz. His work may also be found at http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com.

    LABOUR PARTY POLITICS ELECTION 2023 PHIL SPECTOR JACINDA ARDERN CHRISTOPHER LUXON SHANE RETI
    Your access to our unique and original content is free, and always has been.
    But ad revenues are under pressure so we need your support.

    Supporters can choose any amount, and will get a premium ad-free experience if giving a minimum of $10/month or $100/year. Learn more here.

    BECOME A SUPPORTER

    We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

    Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don’t welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

    ADD NEW COMMENT
    177 Comments
    (1 new)
    Add new comment
    Comment

    About text formats
    Comments that were posted after you last read this story will be highlighted.
    by GV 27 | 7th Nov 22, 8:09am
    Great, wonderful, inspiring speaking. Pity about the policies, the execution, the accountability and the ability to drive change through the civil service. It’s the second bits that actually lead to meaningful change and outcomes.

    But what’s a few thousand kids living in emergency accommodation that could be resolved for the cost of what we’re on the hook for RBNZ’s Covid bonanza. What sort of difference would $9b have made? That’s 4x what Kiwibuild was slated to cost. But who cares about measurable outcomes or critically assessing policy when we could talk about how important speeches at party conferences are.

    REPLY
    Up
    37
    by ACB | 7th Nov 22, 8:22am
    It’s a sad day for society that we fall for charisma, word-salad making, age and even looks rather than policy and implementation. And that we make judgements based on the PM alone rather than the capabilities of their cabinets and wider caucus.

    REPLY
    Up
    47
    by RickStrauss | 7th Nov 22, 1:09pm
    Twice in a row now, John Key then Jacinda Ardern. It’s the willingness to act on the difficult issues after campaigning on them that seemed to vanish.

    REPLY
    Up
    4
    by Foxglove | 7th Nov 22, 8:33am
    The art of film-flam has been developed and perfected by PM Adern certainly, but not always. The display on the AM TV show concerning the protestors was a grotesque display. Arms flailing, shouting down the questions. When the facade cracks what creeps into view is of little substance, unimpressive and a little disturbing. Luxon may well be short on such glibness, but he has proven he can run a big business and succeed in an environment that PM Adern herself, has never even encountered.

    REPLY
    Up
    14
    by Audaxes | 7th Nov 22, 8:44am
    A majority owned government utility underwritten by bank funding and taxpayer largesse.

    REPLY
    Up
    23

    by kiwikidsnz | 7th Nov 22, 9:21am
    Prior to his role at AirNZ, Luxon worked for Unilever from 1993 to 2011, being based in Wellington (1993–1995), Sydney (1995–2000), London (2000–2003), Chicago (2003–2008) and Toronto (2008–2011). He rose to be the President and chief executive officer of its Canadian operations.

    EDIT
    REPLY
    Up
    12
    by ngakonui gold | 7th Nov 22, 10:30am
    As opposed to JA wrapping up the Friday night take aways.

    REPLY
    Up
    13
    by Gummy Bear Hero | 7th Nov 22, 11:58am
    Luxon did that too … as a young fella , a stint at Maccas in Merivale …. plus , he followed that up with managing big enterprises in North America & NZ …

    … so , who’s got a better skillset to lead NZ … Luxon or Ardern : it’s that simple …

    REPLY
    Up
    9
    by RickStrauss | 7th Nov 22, 1:10pm
    Apparently everything needs to be run as a business. Short term profit and share price is all that matters. Has served us we’ll thus far, ignoring the long term.

    REPLY
    Up
    6
    by Yvil | 7th Nov 22, 1:52pm
    That’s a short sighted comment, if you want to provide for the lower income families you need… $, yes RS dollars, money, mulah and spending more of it than earning, like the current government is doing, is not good for anyone. Like the saying goes “It’s all-out the economy silly”

    REPLY
    Up
    5

    by RickStrauss | 7th Nov 22, 4:37pm
    Like the saying goes “It’s all-out the economy silly”

    That there is a shortsighted comment. That brought us more reliance on pushing house prices up and failing to actually encourage investment in business instead – under Key. Borrowing for tax cuts to spend more than you earn is more of the same as Labour spending beyond their means.

    Luxon seems ill-equipped to think beyond the equivalent of the short-term share price, to encompass longer-term issues facing the country.

    He’d make a good operations manager in an SOE, possibly.

    REPLY
    Up
    1
    by Stuart Mason | 7th Nov 22, 1:19pm
    Good comment Foxglove.

    As a communicator, I have always found PM Ardern lacking in versatility in the sense that she doesn’t like getting into the detail and wants the conversation to return to her comfort zone; which in my experience is talking in generalities. On the rare occasion an interviewer challenges her modus operandi, they rarely get given a second chance. I agree with Chris about the publics’ love affair with celebrity. However, celebrity can only get you so far for so long, before you get found out as lacking substance. I think the public reached that point with the PM … Read more

    REPLY
    Up
    9
    by EdwardD | 7th Nov 22, 5:43pm
    I agree. I was waiting for the rubber to hit the road years back. All talk and little substance.

    REPLY
    Up
    2
    by Roger the dodger | 7th Nov 22, 8:27am
    Adern is a great speaker, but a poor communicator. So many redundant words are used that the message is unclear.

    Luxon simply needs to do the opposite. Focus on clear communication and zero fluff.

    REPLY
    Up
    26
    by npc | 7th Nov 22, 8:28am
    Maybe that’s the point. There’s no message. I mean look at the disaster that has been her tenure, how could that possibly be spun into something positive?

    The goal of the speech is to give a general vibe of being the “good guys”.

    REPLY
    Up
    21

    by Brock Landers | 7th Nov 22, 8:34am
    The virtue signalling ambulance chaser that lied her way into power and locked a million kiwi citizens out of their own country.

    It’s never going to be forgotten.

    REPLY
    Up
    21
    by Rex Pat | 7th Nov 22, 9:12am
    Absolutely agree re Luxon. Stick to the point, delete the fluff and learn the art of a pause, to think. He needs better training. He also needs to lose some weight. I will vote ACT no matter what he does, but I need him to win the center vote to make mine a winner.

    REPLY
    Up
    7
    by RickStrauss | 7th Nov 22, 1:11pm
    Hopefully he starts to talk sense soon.

    REPLY
    Up
    0
    by npc | 7th Nov 22, 1:26pm
    Tax relief (fuel, income tax, bright line, interest deductability)

    Cost savings (light rail, employment insurance, fair pay all binned)

    Crime (patches, gang gatherings banned)

    .. seems plenty sensible to me.

    REPLY
    Up
    5
    by Whatwillhappen | 7th Nov 22, 3:52pm
    You forgot first year tertiary fees free (middle class welfare) and interest free student loans (set them at the cost of government bonds) Another billion or more right there.

    REPLY
    Up
    3

    by RickStrauss | 7th Nov 22, 4:40pm
    Tax cuts on property speculators during a housing crisis, to leave working Kiwis paying all the taxes again. Wowsers. That’s just pandering to entitlement mentality.

    Cutting fair pay while banning patches seems like a failure to think things through, coupled with a bit of virtue signaling on the side.

    REPLY
    Up
    3
    by lowercase capitalist | 7th Nov 22, 5:11pm
    Banning patches seems like a stupid idea, most criminals don’t dress in a criminals uniform voluntarily.

    It would be a lot easier to catch theives if they all dressed like the hamburgler.

    REPLY
    Up
    2
    by Sluggy | 7th Nov 22, 5:49pm
    Banning patches is populist bullshit. It will solve nothing.

    Overall policy is akin to a tax time machine. Roll back 3 years.

    I’m a word uninspiring, boring, visionless. That’s 3. To be fair labour are no better.

    REPLY
    Up
    2
    by Rex Pat | 7th Nov 22, 1:27pm
    Would it make any difference to you if he did? Your third vote for JA coming up?

    REPLY
    Up
    4
    by RickStrauss | 7th Nov 22, 4:33pm
    I have voted for National in a majority of elections and never once for Labour. I voted for Key when he campaigned on fixing the housing crisis and productivity problem.

    The problem is a lack of useful policy and willingness to act on difficult issues.

    It’d be pointless tribalism to vote for Luxon and National currently.

    REPLY
    Up
    2

    by nicholastwig | 7th Nov 22, 10:22am
    The absence of fluff doesn’t mean Luxon has a message – he doesn’t.

    REPLY
    Up
    4
    by Rex Pat | 7th Nov 22, 10:38am
    I disagree. He seems inclined to think he’s speaking to an unintelligent audience and has to explain his point from multiple angles, with metaphors etc. This leaves what he says open to interpretation and attack from the left biased media. An example was the abortion question. Just say the law won’t change under his leadership. Seymour is always succinct and on message. He is leagues ahead of the rest.

    REPLY
    Up
    7
    by Gummy Bear Hero | 7th Nov 22, 11:01am
    Seymour has been the ” leader of the opposition ” since 2017 … consistently constructively critical of the Labour government … and , with sensible commonsense policies of his own …

    REPLY
    Up
    9
    by the Joneses | 7th Nov 22, 1:55pm
    Absence of fluff? On most interviews I hear he starts sentences with “What I am saying to you is”. Instantly makes me tune out, I already know he is talking.

    REPLY
    Up
    3
    by Rex Pat | 7th Nov 22, 2:58pm
    Exactly. That’s fluff. It conveys no info.

    REPLY
    Up
    0

    by HouseMouse | 7th Nov 22, 9:31am
    There’s no reason – if the PM is *so good* at emergency management, that the government, and a ‘Labour’ one at that, couldn’t have got a few building companies to mass produce prefabricated housing for emergency housing, and build it around the country in the housing hotspots.

    A motivated and even semi-capable government could have done that within 2-3 years.

    REPLY
    Up
    6
    by HW2 | 7th Nov 22, 10:23am
    Talk is cheap but action isn’t. In fact it seems to get more complex. I watched some movie with John T, urban cowboy. He got married and bought a house for his new wife. Mind you it was one of those trailer homes. When the new wife saw the new home she was absolutely ecstatic. Something she could call their own.

    Offer today’s young people a similar style house and they would probably be very offended and turn their noses up. As a nation we have been spoiled rotten.

    REPLY
    Up
    4
    by yeahnah | 7th Nov 22, 1:49pm
    Building the houses is the easy bit. But houses need utilities, roads and services. People need hospitals, schools and other services. Add in council and iwi consenting processes and you have a ongoing delays. Of course the central govt have created this playing field and thus created a rod for their own back.

    REPLY
    Up
    3
    by Yvil | 7th Nov 22, 1:55pm
    Labour found it very difficult building 100’000 affordable houses

    REPLY
    Up
    0
    by HouseMouse | 7th Nov 22, 3:05pm
    There’s plenty of government land all around the country, even in many smaller centres. They introduced the Urban Development Act in 2020 which they have hardly used at all, go figure. It allows them to bypass the consenting processes of councils. Sorry, those excuses don’t hold sway.

    REPLY
    Up
    2

    by Carlos67 | 7th Nov 22, 10:17am
    What does it matter how good a communicator they are if what comes out of their mouth never happens ? It has taken the general NZ public 5 years to work out how useless this lot have been. Huge changes in 2023, its going to be a big year with the way the world is going.

    REPLY
    Up
    12
    by lastlegs | 7th Nov 22, 10:35am
    if you really were concerned about thousands living in emergency accommodation then you wouldnt be voting for luxon,as his only focus till now has been to promote and enrich himself and has shown no interest in doing it for anybody else.

    REPLY
    Up
    6
    by Nifty1 | 7th Nov 22, 8:18am
    I can’t listen to her anymore… you know what you’re going to get – a frown, a laugh, a few sarcastic comments, no answer to the question, a statement of how well were doing – compared to the rest of the world…

    REPLY
    Up
    43
    by Gummy Bear Hero | 7th Nov 22, 8:35am
    … I got frustrated listening to her because her conversations were all hot air , puff & flowery rhetoric , no substance , nothing tangible … and she seldom answers a question directly , often wandering off tangent into another cloud of grey waffle …

    How much better a Dave Seymour or even a Crusher Collins , who succinctly answers any question put to them …

    REPLY
    Up
    19
    by Small Kev | 7th Nov 22, 11:24am
    To JA : Just resign and spend time with your daughter. There no point anymore so stop wasting more time and energy. Cheers

    REPLY
    Up
    9

    by HW2 | 7th Nov 22, 11:49am
    Yep, I have felt like that too. I was talking to a mate telling him I have to change the channel or turn off the radio. I thought I might be alone but he said he does the same

    REPLY
    Up
    9
    by Carlos67 | 7th Nov 22, 1:02pm
    I turn it off as well. I think its that deliberate authoritarian tone, the one that lets you know I’m in charge and therefore I know what I’m doing when in reality she has no idea. Next year will be the wall of silence…….

    REPLY
    Up
    4
    by EdwardD | 7th Nov 22, 5:52pm
    My wife and I can’t stand her and we now avoid all NZTV and radio as she is their puppet master.

    REPLY
    Up
    1
    by HouseMouse | 7th Nov 22, 12:33pm
    Yep I switch the radio or video off once she starts speaking. Infuriating.

    NB I am politically centre-left.

    REPLY
    Up
    6
    by Foxglove | 7th Nov 22, 12:53pm
    Ditto (to all of you.) The final straw was the farce in Auckland where you could share the barbecue but not pee inside and she dished out like a prim prissy school ma’am something like – I just wish people would do as they are told. As Richard Prebble said about Clark’s government ‘control freaks’ and this lot are worse.

    REPLY
    Up
    6

    by Dale Smith | 7th Nov 22, 1:04pm
    Socialists think that the reason Stalin and Mao failed was not that socialism doesn’t work, but because they were the wrong type of control freaks.

    Labour, JA et al think (thought) they are the right type of control freaks.

    REPLY
    Up
    3
    by DD62 | 7th Nov 22, 6:22pm
    Same Nifty1!. Rarely watch any TV news now and if I do and she speaks I either fast forward or change channels. She talks a lot to say exactly nothing! Always has! Listen to her diction, it’s appalling! As I’ve said here many times, she is the emperors new cloths and worst PM we have ever had!!!!

    REPLY
    Up
    2
    by dumbthoughts | 7th Nov 22, 8:29am
    Don’t forget the ability to reject the premise of any question you don’t want to answer … that one is critical too.

    REPLY
    Up
    27
    by Yvil | 7th Nov 22, 1:57pm
    Masterful!

    REPLY
    Up
    1
    by kiwikidsnz | 7th Nov 22, 8:31am
    On her track record how can anyone really believe any word she says ?

    Then there are the “lies of omission”: the secret agendas & major policies implemented that were never put to the public for an electoral mandate.

    NZ needs to vote this Govt out while we’ve still got a democracy left do it with.

    EDIT
    REPLY
    Up
    20

    by Yvil | 7th Nov 22, 1:57pm
    32% still do!

    REPLY
    Up
    0
    by Audaxes | 7th Nov 22, 8:37am
    That what people are looking for in a leader are exactly the same qualities they admire in a game-show host. Warmth, wit, and a complete absence of condescension, obviously. But, also unflappability: the quality of always appearing to be on top of things – even when they are going wrong.

    We get the government we deserve. I guess I will have to reserve judgement yet again at the forthcoming election.

    REPLY
    Up
    6
    by kiwikidsnz | 7th Nov 22, 9:02am
    Originally Joseph De Maistre said “In a democracy, the people end up with the government and leaders they deserve”.

    How much democracy will NZ have compromised after Labours current term …& how much will be abrogated should they ever be in power in future ?

    Jacinda said NZdrs needed to be more “sophisticated” to accept co-governance:

    sophistry
    /ˈsɒfɪstri/
    noun
    the use of clever but false arguments, especially with the intention of deceiving.
    a fallacious argument.

    Willie Jackson maintains that democracy doesnt mean 1 person 1 vote.

      • Good on you, this verbiage gets in the way here.
        Its simple really, Labour has exhausted its historic mission to neuter the labour movement smothering it in parliament.
        Real workers have long seen it for the wolf in sheep’s clothing that it is.
        Abstention will not prove anything. NACT will be even worse.
        There is time to revive the MANA party on a program of workers’ taking power and getting rid of the dying capitalist system.

    • “It is a testimony to just how much Ardern learned about the art of communication at the University of Waikato, that she has been able to parlay her talent as an MC into the skills of a PM. She grasped early what her predecessors – Phil Goff, David Shearer, David Cunliffe and Andrew Little – missed. That what people are looking for in a leader are exactly the same qualities they admire in a game-show host. Warmth, wit, and a complete absence of condescension, obviously. But, also unflappability: the quality of always appearing to be on top of things – even when they are going wrong.”

      /Agree And with much of your analysis. And the MC doesn’t actually have to DO anything other than introduce and praise her ministers and officials in the game show.

      Except increasingly I find people are becoming heartily sick of the rhubarb rhubarb that dresses up the bleeding bloody obvious and people’s own life’s experiences as being something different. That even includes public servant worker bees at the coal face – many of whom now just want to get the hell out.

  4. I thought there were inaccuracies in Ardern’s speech, eg glibly over-simplifying the issue of the abolition of capital punishment, which has an extensive back history, internationally, and involving both National and Labour in New Zealand, and took place during the ‘ Hanan- Robson Years’ , described by Jim McLay as one of the great periods of New Zealand law reform, in his published review of John Robson’s “ Sacred Cows and Rogue Elephants”, both of which I have before me right now, but don’t have time to reread.

    Robson, the Secretary for Justice, described by McLay as ‘creative, intelligent and humane’, had a good working relationship with Ralph Hanan, and as a non-politician he contributed largely to major law reform, such as the capital punishment issue, establishing the ombudsman, introducing periodic detention, and criminal injuries compensation. The sacred cows of Treasury and Government Service Tribunals were areas where Dr Robson, is recognised as adept by McLay, and Robson’s account of the law reforms which took place in the 60’s are meticulous and that period shouldn’t be glossed over.

    • A range of activists were involved in the campaign to end the death penalty … in 1956 my grandmother co-founded the National Committee for the Abolition of Capital Punishment and activists were subsequently involved in publicity campaigns & the lobbying of MPs (the NZ Howard League for penal reform also played a role).

      • Swordfish, Great stuff. John Robson, mentions at least one powerful women’a lobbying group, but from memory it may be the pro- hangers, who later withdrew their opposition; he links to contemporary international research and thought, and what was happening here, wasn’t just a goody Labour govt saying, “ Let’s do this, “, but various groups beavering away at an impressive intellectual level which we don’t seem to see now – apart from the NGO’s fruitlessly lobbying government on issues like the Children’s Commissioner, Homelessness , and I daresay others.

  5. “On the 9th floor of the Beehive building in Wellington, sitting directly behind my desk, is a picture of Michael Joseph Savage. You could say he’s on my shoulder but also ever so slightly in my ear”

    Jeez who wrote that crap?

    Sort of stuff you would expect from a ghost writer for Mills and Boon

    • 🙂 Indeed!
      But for Her to have vetted the speech and actually read it is an indication she truly believes it. It’s almost religious in nature.
      Here’s hoping (like Lange) she might have a cup of tea and an epiphany sometime soon.
      I’ll be celebrating IF and WHEN Labour pull off a win in ’23, with some coalition partners although the signs are not good. But I will not be party voting Labour (after a lifetime). We deserve better than the least worst option – especially after the mandate they were handed and which they have squandered.
      And sure as shit I won’t be going round the town delivering pamphlets and partaking in the campaign after they’ve shat on relatives and extended family that’ve been subjected to the likes of OT, immigration policy and crumbling healthcare. They’ll need to pull out something really substantial and transformative before I even give an electorate vote.
      Same goes pretty much for the entire traditionally leftie neighbourhood I live in.

      • Once was Tim. They ride on the coat tails of great men of history – Savage, Kirk – and think that it’ll make them look good too. It doesn’t.

  6. “Ardern’s compassion and words and big promises, that once were her stardust, now just come across as disingenuous.

    All those things she promised in 2017, they were just words.”

    As for baldy from Te Puke …

    “Luxon too. He comes across as too scripted and trying too hard to appear bourgeois and one of the people.”

    https://www.todayfm.co.nz/home/opinion/2022/11/lloyd-burr-the-two-contenders-to-be-our-prime-minister-in-a-years-time-are-boring-and-bereft.html

  7. Chris mentions older voters’ memories of past political events and moods, I recall the 70s as being a period of optimism on the left, building on the momentum from the 60s presumably. It certainly wasn’t all beer and skittles but by the late 80s that optimism was all gone, as planned by the business interests backing Douglas / Prebble and co. The current generation of Labour politicians have grown up in the climate of the 80s, not the 60s, and seem unable to think beyond the neoliberal boundaries that have taken root since then – and on top of that many have separate agendas which are not about improving the lot of the country and its people.
    So yes many of the older “whiter” conservatives will vote National but many of the older “whiter” folks have literally nobody credible left to support.

    • And many young and not so young now voters grew up in an age of ever increasing cotton wool wrapping and helicopter parenting – no wonder Labour’s messages of making us safe and being kind resonate with them.

  8. The implication is that Labour will be done in by older white right wingers. Most of the ones I know in that category are enamoured with Ardern and have voted Labour recently after previously voting National. The ones in that category that I know who arenow most opposed to Labour are previous Green and Labour voters. Additionally I know young and middle aged women voters who previously voted Labour who won’t this time around.

    The reasons are 3 waters, lack of action on housing, mental health, poverty, banks, supermarket monopolies etc and that they feel Labour are condescending and anything but transparent. There is a sense that they are governing by stealth.

    Rather than a right wing plot I think Labour are being hoist on their own petard. They had the gift of an absolute majority and squandered it. To hear Ardern complaining about bank profits but not do anything about it is symptomatic of the problem. They are the architects of their own defeat.

    • Absolutely right. The real tragedy is that (any remaining) social democrat type liberals will abandon Labour who will end up competing with the Greens and Maori party for votes and policies and the right wing bloc will have a free run for the next few elections. Fun times.

  9. Chris Trotter
    “…as they watch their older, whiter, and righter neighbours set off to destroy the Sixth Labour Government.”
    That’s what happend in Auckland. I am in the boomer demographic and I don’t know anyone amongst our friends who did not vote for WB in that local election. Reason? “We have to make sure we don’t get another Labour mayor.” In fairness, now that we have him, at least Wayne Brown is putting the blowtorch on the way council is run and the way it pisses away our hard earned money…funny that – Auckland Council operates just like our current govt….now why is that? Labour!

    • If we didn’t have the “Labour” mayors in the supercity we would mostly have had meathead mayors called John (Banks, Palino and Tamihere). Give the voters better choices and maybe they’ll elect better mayors. The recent election got the voter turnout it deserved.

  10. Ardern squandered the outright mandate she received to introduce transformational changes.
    It is a certainty that NAct won’t squander theirs and that they will complete the 35 year old rape and pillage of NZ’s publicly owned assets.

    • Didn’t Labour start the selling of the silverware in Douglas’s day? After all, isn’t that how Fay, Richwhite and Hart made their wealth from……

        • The point is you can say nothing with certainty of any party. All you can say is there MAY be a certainty. If Labour retain power, they MAY complete the 35 year old rape and pillage of NZ’s publicly owned assets based on past form from below-

          From Scoop, dated 15/11/2019 – “Despite a commitment in its policy to “keep forestry in New Zealand hands by requiring the sale of logging rights on land over 50 hectares to be approved by the Overseas Investment Office for overseas purchasers”, Labour is facilitating the sale of thousands of hectares of farmland to overseas forestry companies and by-passing the Overseas Investment Office in the process.”

          • Sigh. Yes you are correct, it is almost impossible to predict the future. But that’s an asinine observation.

            It is stretching it to regard selling a product (trees) as the same as selling going-concern State businesses or non-renewable concrete assets and infrastructure.

            The track record and intentions of the parties concerned have been stated by the parties themselves, and obvious from their record, both for and over the past two decades, despite your obfuscation.

    • I’m not sure how ‘introducing transformational change’ works.

      What would the public wear/have worn? Bringing in strategies to cope with a pandemic was a bridge too far for a very vociferous number. Should the government have gone for broke the day after the last election? (To allow as long a period as possible before the Nat/ACT government got rid of them, rescinded them.)

      The immaturity, short-sightedness, ego-centricity and ignorance of the electorate means nothing is an easy go. Ardern is criticised on one hand for not doing anything, not making bold calls and making changes, and on the other hand is criticised for being dictatorial and ploughing ahead doing stuff people don’t want. We are a cot case.

      The best way ahead? For a legion of Labour MPs it’s to job seek now. For others likely to be back it’s working out what they could possibly say across the House to the new Government, to Chris Bishop about Rotorua Motels housing thousands, Mark Mitchell about all the police numbers, Shane Reti about hospitals and nurse pay rates and David Seymour about voucher education for schooling.

      Tax changes?

  11. BUT, who else can we vote for?
    NZ politics is so well contained and limited (on purpose?).
    There is NO alternative (TINO). If there was a believable, genuine left wing party that could get to 5%, they would get ALL of LINO’s ‘walk away’ votes and the right wouldn’t automatically walk in to Governemnt.
    Maybe that is whay there is no alternative REAL-left wing party; to give the voters no real choice, like in America.
    Two parties, 95+% the same politics, but dressed up slightly differently and worded confusing enough to hide the fact.

  12. “The redefinition of democracy which lies at the heart of all three proposals requires attributes this government simply does not possess. The intellectual ability to frame and present an argument. The straightforwardness needed to persuade even one’s own voters to accept it.”

    Nailed it Chris. This whole debacle could have been avoided if she had just made her case on co governance and invited the rest of us to be part of the conversation. But she has repeatedly chosen the path of less involvement, more closed doors and greater top down. A pity she didnt study leadership along with her Comms. Change must start from the bottom and can never be successful if imposed from the TOP.

    As to your second article, helpfully pasted here. I too saw Reti on Q&A and was once again impressed. The man has mana and very obvious intellect and attention to detail. Luxon simply doesnt have that, neither does Willis. i think National has to ditch Luxon and fast. He is not an election winner. The anyone but Jacinda vote may be sufficient to carry him but it will still be a close thing. With someone like Reti and Stanford or Reti and Penk or maybe Goldsmith, there may be a chance. Reti isnt Mr Charisma but he very much has the safe pair of hands and considered policy making vibe going for him.

    Its what a lot of NZers are looking for, not a Glib Humpty Dumpty who is clearly out of his depth.

  13. One must feel a little sorry for the Bert’s of New Zealand who through good and bad stick with Labour. I remember old guy’s in the 1970’s being fiercely proud of Labour and the things they achieved with Jack Lee driving policy ahead against the wishes of senior party politicians….But even the most dedicated Labour supporters must be wondering what the hell’s going on with this lot…They are gone next election , that’s for sure , and it’s going to be a very different country when the National ,ACT, and NZ first with possibly a combined farmer , freedom fighters style group get over the line….It certainly will not be doom and gloom as many on the left predict as there will be some check’s and balances at least , but sadly many will not do well and civil unrest is going to be huge with some people having their wings clipped…..It will be interesting to see if there are civil servants applying for the dole and perhaps the high end foyer designers and manufacturers might suffer from a quiet period….who knows….the climate debate will be gone , that’s for sure and farmers will be able to untangle some of the unworkable red tape from their business plan and get on with doing what they do best…producing fine food….Let’s see if hungry kids get fed and housed….

      • For sure Fantail…..as New Zealand is so small and our emissions really will not make any difference to the final outcome , we are probably better to put our energy into adapting to the change than adding self inflicting cost that are only really feel good for a few ….we need to be more realistic and be more prepared for the changes to come…

  14. Earth to @Bert – where are you – OVER?
    Earth calling @ Bert. Do you receive – OVER?

    @ Bert! There are serious matters to discuss regarding our upcoming campaign. We’re wondering whether we should continue with the existing plans or whether it’s come to most peoples’ attention that one of the only differences between Luxor and Gruntor is the hair, and that Luxor’s team has half of Harcourts Real Estate, and Gruntors the Garbak and Smotty and Gal team

    • He’s locked himself away reading that Shackleton book. He saw Her Belovedness reading it on a plane so he’s quickly catching up. More news soon…

  15. Hope lies in Ilam. If Raf can win the seat for TOP, we’d have the flicker of genuinely transformational policy in Parliament.

    I hope the good people of that Christchurch electorate do NZ a huge favour there.

  16. Phew! For a moment there I lost myself. But then the internal Labour paid for ‘result must be as briefed’ Talbot poll reassured me.

  17. I think Chris has grossly over egged her ability.
    Jacinda has had a fairly easy run until recently.
    For the majority of her time in the media spotlight, she’s had a good number of adoring sycophants, to choose from.
    All through COVID she controlled the media, and narrative like a puppet master.
    She’s proven she can’t handle hard questions, and can’t take the ruff and tumble by walking away from the largest radio audience. Like him or loath him Horsekins has a large and important political audience.
    To turn your back on that, for Jono & Ben, is just an embarrassing admission of defeat.

    In the house she’s had uncle Trev running interference, to protect her.

    My feeling is the verbal diarrhoea she spouts in place of a clear and concise answers and once made her look intelligent, now makes people cynical. The captains calls, and promises of a better world, were what we all wanted to hear, and we believed her. For the first three years, failures or lack of progress could be blamed on MMP and Coalition’s.
    The outright majority and lack of quality people within the party has exposed Labour horribly.

  18. ” “On the 9th floor of the Beehive building in Wellington, sitting directly behind my desk, is a picture of Michael Joseph Savage. You could say he’s on my shoulder but also ever so slightly in my ear ”

    That statement is incredibly fraudulent.

    She is a Labour imposter as is the cabinet and caucus she leads.

    ” Virtually every claim made by the Prime Minister in the passage quoted above is either historically contestable, or just plain, flat-out, wrong. For that very reason, it is a powerful illustration of the deeply flawed thinking that has led the Ardern Government to the brink of electoral ruin.

    Which begs the question had the Christchurch call or the pandemic not happened would they have actually adhered to the principles of Savage and Kirk that presumably Adern , Robbo and all the other neo liberal third way wanbabees being members of the NZLP actually delivered for their core constituency they solicit votes from and protect them from the evil ravages of capitalism ?

  19. I was locked out of NZ by our caring PM during COVID. She smiled about it and made me take part in many lotteries. I would rather vote to have my William cut off with a rusty razor than vote for such a phoney.

  20. My response to Mickey Savage at the Standard and his warm inner glow.

    ” Has Labour been moving the country in the right direction? I believe so and you can consult this list of a hundred things the Government has delivered this year if you need verification. There is also this list of things Labour has achieved while in Government ”

    Great then why are they dropping like a stone in the polls and why is Adern now despised and not trusted two years into her triumphant second term.
    https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/deceitful-dictator-arrogant-smarmy-what-kiwis-really-think-of-ardern-luxon-revealed/ar-AA1

    An historic MMP result , a majority government not seen since 1990-93

    The promised transformation not the incremental change we have had and Adern should have chosen her words more carefully. Trotter is well within his rights to critique this government who had the opportunity to be bold , change the narrative that was being cried out for in 2020 and no NZF handbrake to slow or impede the change so desperately needed.

    They have had nine years in opposition and five years in government to package and sell three waters and at least have an understanding of the likely opposition that would eventuate and plan for that. No political skills no nous !

    Robertson the conservative is more concerned about his legacy than being bold and changing the economic narrative. Where is the vision and the urge to fight so many injustices that their supporters vote Labour to stand up for them.

    He is certainly no Cullen !

    They could of been in government for four terms and kept the Nasties out so they could not unwind the economic reforms that could of been undertaken.

    Of course M.S is happy with what has not been achieved because he is a supporter of neo liberal kindness and these gains he talks about are nowhere near enough on what needs to be done so instead of attacking Trotter write a post on the huge social and economic deficit that they haven’t addressed and you know what those are because I have listed the them ad nauseam . Therein lies the problem with LINO and this rubbish about Savage whispering in Adern’s ear. Its all an insult to the Savage and Kirk governments and offensive to so many that Adern solicited votes from that this is as good as it gets after promising something very different.

    That warm inner glow has more to do with you MS and your government but does not exist out here in the real world.

  21. My response to Mickey Savage at the Standard and his warm inner glow.

    ” Has Labour been moving the country in the right direction? I believe so and you can consult this list of a hundred things the Government has delivered this year if you need verification. There is also this list of things Labour has achieved while in Government ”

    Great then why are they dropping like a stone in the polls and why is Adern now despised and not trusted two years into her triumphant second term.
    https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/national/deceitful-dictator-arrogant-smarmy-what-kiwis-really-think-of-ardern-luxon-revealed/ar-AA1

    An historic MMP result , a majority government not seen since 1990-93

    The promised transformation not the incremental change we have had and Adern should have chosen her words more carefully. Trotter is well within his rights to critique this government who had the opportunity to be bold , change the narrative that was being cried out for in 2020 and no NZF handbrake to slow or impede the change so desperately needed.

    They have had nine years in opposition and five years in government to package and sell three waters and at least have an understanding of the likely opposition that would eventuate and plan for that. No political skills no nous !

    Robertson the conservative is more concerned about his legacy than being bold and changing the economic narrative. Where is the vision and the urge to fight so many injustices that their supporters vote Labour to stand up for them.

    He is certainly no Cullen !

    They could of been in government for four terms and kept the Nasties out so they could not unwind the economic reforms that could of been undertaken.

    Of course M.S is happy with what has not been achieved because he is a supporter of neo liberal kindness and these gains he talks about are nowhere near enough on what needs to be done so instead of attacking Trotter write a post on the huge social and economic deficit that they haven’t addressed and you know what those are because I have listed the them ad nauseam . Therein lies the problem with LINO and this rubbish about Savage whispering in Adern’s ear. Its all an insult to the Savage and Kirk governments and offensive to so many that Adern solicited votes from that this is as good as it gets after promising something very different.

    That warm inner glow has more to do with you MS and your government but does not exist out here in the real world.

    https://thestandard.org.nz/comrade-chris-and-the-politics-of-the-warm-inner-glow/#comment-1920291

    • MS was at home, in his nice property, drinking nice wine, working full time from home during the Pandemic with the government keeping his business afloat paying he wages for his staff – which most likely could also work from home. Of course he can see no wrong. He profited from the leaking tit of government largesse.
      Now the supermarket worker. The nurse, the doctor, the kids and the absolute fuckery of schooling they received, the people that got separated for two years because their spouses could not enter the country, the dead down town centres the country over, the motels full of homeless people, the people that depend on charities to eat etc etc etc etc etc may have a different problem. But they must be all right wingers, almost nazis, ‘feral’ anti government (anti jacinda) haters.
      And MS would very much like to run again for a spot/seat somewhere to get himself on that leaking tit of government largesse.

  22. And Chris Trotter hereby joins the same club as that other political genius, Mike Hosking. Maybe he could get a column in the NZ Herald.

  23. Maybe if Labour hadnt forgotten who their voter base really represent they wouldnt be in this position. Instead they pandered to the right swing voters while ignoring the sick, disabled and the poor. Too busy trying to give the right everything they wanted while doing nothing for anybody else is going to bite them and hard.
    Its like we had 9 years of right wing and then one left wing term where they walked over the sick with the medicinal cannabis thing, did nothing with a review into poverty, housing that hasnt improved, but actually gotten worse and this term without winston being the hand brake decided to pander to the rich instead.
    Labour would be the side I normally vote towards being disabled but at this point in time I dont see a point, they really dont want to help. Just words saying they’re doing really well but on the ground the country is going backwards.

Comments are closed.