On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 23:08:22 +1200, Rich80105<
rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
One for a wry grin, even humour is getting gritty . . . >http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11657226
Yet again you post an ant-National themed article. Yet again you
continue the same approach that has not worked in 8 years and
counting.
It is an indictment of Labour - as the party polling at record low
levels in the MMP era at least - that National party failures (even as spectacular as Raybon Kans article points out) don't impact on their
polling popularity.
The clear conclusion is that Labour (in particular) still don't know
how to counter National's sustained and slightly increasing popularity
despite incidents such as this. A National-dominated government is
still the popular preferred choice.
National hit rock bottom at the 2002 general election. The
unpalatable truth for Labour is that since then National have
increased or held their general popularity - both at general elections
and in the polls - for 14 years or so with 2 Parliamentary leaders
(Brash and Key). To turn this around requires corrective actions
within Labour to turn voters to them. Labour have themselves tried
leadership change (Clark, Goff, Shearer, Cunliffe and Little have been
the Parliamentary leaders in this period) so something else is needed.
Labour have to come up with a way to win back popular support. No
sign yet they have figured out how to do it.
Rich before you post a rebuttal, remember that since 1971 I have only
ever voted for a National Party candidate once. I am therefore
disqualified as a National party supporter.
--
Crash McBash
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)