Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows
that they are very weak: http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will
offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they
stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out
because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential
replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious
problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at
least four people who would make better Ministers than National have available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect
to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First -
NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have
greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:the uptake.
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows
that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will
offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She
rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they
stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out
because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential
replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious
problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at
least four people who would make better Ministers than National have
available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect
to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First -
NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have
greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced
Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially slow on
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for Nationalwhen Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>on the uptake.
wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows
that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will
offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She
rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they
stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out
because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential
replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious
problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at
least four people who would make better Ministers than National have
available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect
to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First -
NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have
greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced
Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially slow
National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a
Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time,
yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill -
and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have
practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have
been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown
well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more
competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts
but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
Not taking about leading polls you dummy. I mean leading an organisation,business or enterprise.
Jacinda worked in a fish and chip shop but as far as I know she didn't manageit.
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows
that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will
offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She
rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they
stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out
because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential
replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious
problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at
least four people who would make better Ministers than National have
available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect
to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First -
NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have
greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced
Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially slow on the uptake.
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a
Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the >advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time,
yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill -
and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have
practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have
been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown
well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more
competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts
but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:02:08 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>on the uptake.
wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows
that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will
offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She >>> rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they >>> stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out
because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential
replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious
problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at >>> least four people who would make better Ministers than National have
available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect >>> to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First - >>> NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have
greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced
Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially slow
National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a
Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the >advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time,
yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill -
and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have >practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have
been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown
well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more
competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts
but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
Now we have suggestions from National supporters that Bill English
should stay as leader of the Opposition for at least a year. The "big
lie" discredits English and Joyce from being leader in an election,
but the rest of National is either discredited by the same
incompetence or dishonesty, or has too little experience. It is a
real problem for National, because Bill English has lost the
credibility he use to have, and they have no-one else.
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:02:08 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows
that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will
offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She >>>> rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they >>>> stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out
because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential
replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious
problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at >>>> least four people who would make better Ministers than National have
available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect >>>> to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First - >>>> NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have
greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced
Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially slow on the uptake.
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a
Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the >>advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time,
yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill -
and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have >>practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have
been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown
well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more
competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts
but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
Now we have suggestions from National supporters that Bill English
should stay as leader of the Opposition for at least a year. The "big
lie" discredits English and Joyce from being leader in an election,
but the rest of National is either discredited by the same
incompetence or dishonesty, or has too little experience. It is a
real problem for National, because Bill English has lost the
credibility he use to have, and they have no-one else.
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:45:33 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>slow on the uptake.
wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:02:08 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows
that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will
offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She >>>> rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they >>>> stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out >>>> because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential
replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious
problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at >>>> least four people who would make better Ministers than National have >>>> available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect >>>> to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First - >>>> NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have
greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced >>>> Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially
National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a >>Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the >>advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time,
yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill -
and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have >>practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have >>been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown >>well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more
competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts
but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
Now we have suggestions from National supporters that Bill English
should stay as leader of the Opposition for at least a year. The "big
lie" discredits English and Joyce from being leader in an election,
but the rest of National is either discredited by the same
incompetence or dishonesty, or has too little experience. It is a
real problem for National, because Bill English has lost the
credibility he use to have, and they have no-one else.
National got what percentage of the party vote? How was any
credibility lost with that result?
The Government that Labour and Jacinda Ardern lead has 55 seats (of
120) - Labour with 46 and NZF with 9. There is a
confidence-and-supply agreement with the Greens with 8 seats that
gives Ardern a majority of 3.
In opposition we have National (56 seats) and ACT (1 seat).
National had their credibility confirmed by this result. This is our
first Parliament where the party that gained the largest number of
seats (56 - substantially more than Labour, next on 46) is the
Opposition. National get their support from shallow pragmatism rather
than visionary conviction.
NZF has only ever been in a coalition government once (1996-1998) so
it did not last a full term. If there is future tension between
Labour and NZF (inevitable from time to time), perhaps Peters sees
Ardern's inexperience as a leader as an attribute that can be
exploited.
--
Crash McBash
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:45:33 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>on the uptake.
wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:02:08 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows
that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will
offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She >>>>> rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they >>>>> stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out >>>>> because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential
replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious
problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at >>>>> least four people who would make better Ministers than National have >>>>> available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect >>>>> to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First - >>>>> NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have
greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced >>>>> Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially slow
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a >>>Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the >>>advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time,
yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill -
and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have >>>practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have >>>been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown >>>well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more
competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts
but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
Now we have suggestions from National supporters that Bill English
should stay as leader of the Opposition for at least a year. The "big
lie" discredits English and Joyce from being leader in an election,
but the rest of National is either discredited by the same
incompetence or dishonesty, or has too little experience. It is a
real problem for National, because Bill English has lost the
credibility he use to have, and they have no-one else.
National got what percentage of the party vote? How was any
credibility lost with that result?
The Government that Labour and Jacinda Ardern lead has 55 seats (of
120) - Labour with 46 and NZF with 9. There is a
confidence-and-supply agreement with the Greens with 8 seats that
gives Ardern a majority of 3.
In opposition we have National (56 seats) and ACT (1 seat).
National had their credibility confirmed by this result. This is our
first Parliament where the party that gained the largest number of
seats (56 - substantially more than Labour, next on 46) is the
Opposition. National get their support from shallow pragmatism rather
than visionary conviction.
NZF has only ever been in a coalition government once (1996-1998) so
it did not last a full term. If there is future tension between
Labour and NZF (inevitable from time to time), perhaps Peters sees
Ardern's inexperience as a leader as an attribute that can be
exploited.
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 14:08:17 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:45:33 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:02:08 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>>>wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows >>>>>> that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will
offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She >>>>>> rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they >>>>>> stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out >>>>>> because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential
replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious >>>>>> problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at >>>>>> least four people who would make better Ministers than National have >>>>>> available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect >>>>>> to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First - >>>>>> NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have
greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced >>>>>> Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially slow on the uptake.
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a >>>>Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the >>>>advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time, >>>>yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill -
and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have >>>>practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have >>>>been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown >>>>well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more
competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts
but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
Now we have suggestions from National supporters that Bill English
should stay as leader of the Opposition for at least a year. The "big >>>lie" discredits English and Joyce from being leader in an election,
but the rest of National is either discredited by the same
incompetence or dishonesty, or has too little experience. It is a
real problem for National, because Bill English has lost the
credibility he use to have, and they have no-one else.
National got what percentage of the party vote? How was any
credibility lost with that result?
I was referring to his personal credibility, Crash. Despite English
being clearly invovled in much of the "dirty tricks"behaviour from
National, the party tried hard to protect the reputation of both Key
and subsequently English - the spin fed to the nedia was that English
may be rather dull , but that he was essentially honest. The veneer >protecting that reputation was destroyed by his public support for the
"big lie" of the 11 bn so-called "hole" - it became clear that he was >donkey-deep in the pooh of National's deliberate deceptive behaviour.
He now has no credibility as being at all trustworthy or believeable.
The Government that Labour and Jacinda Ardern lead has 55 seats (of
120) - Labour with 46 and NZF with 9. There is a
confidence-and-supply agreement with the Greens with 8 seats that
gives Ardern a majority of 3.
In opposition we have National (56 seats) and ACT (1 seat).
National had their credibility confirmed by this result. This is our
first Parliament where the party that gained the largest number of
seats (56 - substantially more than Labour, next on 46) is the
Opposition. National get their support from shallow pragmatism rather
than visionary conviction.
NZF has only ever been in a coalition government once (1996-1998) so
it did not last a full term. If there is future tension between
Labour and NZF (inevitable from time to time), perhaps Peters sees
Ardern's inexperience as a leader as an attribute that can be
exploited.
All irrelevant - so far at least the partnership seems to be working
well.
On the other hand, look at what National's pollster recommends to
National:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/10/goals_for_national.html
It fits with their actions in the campaign, and is consistent with
past National behaviour towards "support parties." Let us hope they
see those recommendations as worth following!
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 15:56:42 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>She
wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 00:21:25 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 14:08:17 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:45:33 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:02:08 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows >>>>>>> that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will >>>>>>> offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks.
theyrightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys -
atstand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out >>>>>>> because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential >>>>>>> replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious >>>>>>> problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have
respectleast four people who would make better Ministers than National have >>>>>>> available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with
-to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First
slow on the uptake.NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have >>>>>>> greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced >>>>>>> Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major >>>>>>> rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially
National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for
Your conjecture on English's personal credibility and National's
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a >>>>>Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the >>>>>advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time, >>>>>yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill - >>>>>and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have >>>>>practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have >>>>>been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown >>>>>well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more >>>>>competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts >>>>>but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
Now we have suggestions from National supporters that Bill English >>>>should stay as leader of the Opposition for at least a year. The "big >>>>lie" discredits English and Joyce from being leader in an election, >>>>but the rest of National is either discredited by the same >>>>incompetence or dishonesty, or has too little experience. It is a >>>>real problem for National, because Bill English has lost the >>>>credibility he use to have, and they have no-one else.
National got what percentage of the party vote? How was any >>>credibility lost with that result?
I was referring to his personal credibility, Crash. Despite English
being clearly invovled in much of the "dirty tricks"behaviour from >>National, the party tried hard to protect the reputation of both Key
and subsequently English - the spin fed to the nedia was that English
may be rather dull , but that he was essentially honest. The veneer >>protecting that reputation was destroyed by his public support for the >>"big lie" of the 11 bn so-called "hole" - it became clear that he was >>donkey-deep in the pooh of National's deliberate deceptive behaviour.
He now has no credibility as being at all trustworthy or believeable.
behaviour during the election campaign is clearly not supported by the >large number of voters who party-voted National. If what you say were
to have any credibility that party-vote support should have
evaporated. It did not.
The Government that Labour and Jacinda Ardern lead has 55 seats (of >>>120) - Labour with 46 and NZF with 9. There is a
confidence-and-supply agreement with the Greens with 8 seats that
gives Ardern a majority of 3.
In opposition we have National (56 seats) and ACT (1 seat).
National had their credibility confirmed by this result. This is our >>>first Parliament where the party that gained the largest number of >>>seats (56 - substantially more than Labour, next on 46) is the >>>Opposition. National get their support from shallow pragmatism rather >>>than visionary conviction.
NZF has only ever been in a coalition government once (1996-1998) so
it did not last a full term. If there is future tension between
Labour and NZF (inevitable from time to time), perhaps Peters sees >>>Ardern's inexperience as a leader as an attribute that can be >>>exploited.
All irrelevant - so far at least the partnership seems to be working >>well.
Really? It has not actually started yet and history gives a good
indicator on what might be to come. Remember that Winston entered >Parliament in 1977 - 3 years or so before Adern was born. Winston
does not do courtesy - he could not even be bothered to call Adern or >English before announcing his decision last Thursday.
On the other hand, look at what National's pollster recommends to >>National:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/10/goals_for_national.html
It fits with their actions in the campaign, and is consistent with
past National behaviour towards "support parties." Let us hope they
see those recommendations as worth following!
Both you and DPF appear to ignore what to me is the most obvious goal
- increase your party-vote support by 6% or so and govern alone. That >might be a big ask while English remains as Parliamentary leader but
it is not impossible.
I think that is exactly what Farrar is recommending - National can't
work with anyone, so recognise that and burn off any potential
partners. I hope your "obvious goal" is shared by National, Crash.
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 00:21:25 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 14:08:17 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:Your conjecture on English's personal credibility and National's
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:45:33 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:02:08 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows >>>>>>> that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will >>>>>>> offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She >>>>>>> rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they >>>>>>> stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out >>>>>>> because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential >>>>>>> replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious >>>>>>> problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at >>>>>>> least four people who would make better Ministers than National have >>>>>>> available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect >>>>>>> to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First - >>>>>>> NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have >>>>>>> greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced >>>>>>> Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major
rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially slow on the uptake.
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a >>>>>Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the >>>>>advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time, >>>>>yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill - >>>>>and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have >>>>>practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have >>>>>been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown >>>>>well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more >>>>>competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts >>>>>but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
Now we have suggestions from National supporters that Bill English >>>>should stay as leader of the Opposition for at least a year. The "big >>>>lie" discredits English and Joyce from being leader in an election,
but the rest of National is either discredited by the same
incompetence or dishonesty, or has too little experience. It is a
real problem for National, because Bill English has lost the >>>>credibility he use to have, and they have no-one else.
National got what percentage of the party vote? How was any
credibility lost with that result?
I was referring to his personal credibility, Crash. Despite English
being clearly invovled in much of the "dirty tricks"behaviour from >>National, the party tried hard to protect the reputation of both Key
and subsequently English - the spin fed to the nedia was that English
may be rather dull , but that he was essentially honest. The veneer >>protecting that reputation was destroyed by his public support for the
"big lie" of the 11 bn so-called "hole" - it became clear that he was >>donkey-deep in the pooh of National's deliberate deceptive behaviour.
He now has no credibility as being at all trustworthy or believeable.
behaviour during the election campaign is clearly not supported by the
large number of voters who party-voted National. If what you say were
to have any credibility that party-vote support should have
evaporated. It did not.
The Government that Labour and Jacinda Ardern lead has 55 seats (of
120) - Labour with 46 and NZF with 9. There is a
confidence-and-supply agreement with the Greens with 8 seats that
gives Ardern a majority of 3.
In opposition we have National (56 seats) and ACT (1 seat).
National had their credibility confirmed by this result. This is our >>>first Parliament where the party that gained the largest number of
seats (56 - substantially more than Labour, next on 46) is the >>>Opposition. National get their support from shallow pragmatism rather >>>than visionary conviction.
NZF has only ever been in a coalition government once (1996-1998) so
it did not last a full term. If there is future tension between
Labour and NZF (inevitable from time to time), perhaps Peters sees >>>Ardern's inexperience as a leader as an attribute that can be
exploited.
All irrelevant - so far at least the partnership seems to be working
well.
Really? It has not actually started yet and history gives a good
indicator on what might be to come. Remember that Winston entered
Parliament in 1977 - 3 years or so before Adern was born. Winston
does not do courtesy - he could not even be bothered to call Adern or
English before announcing his decision last Thursday.
On the other hand, look at what National's pollster recommends to
National:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/10/goals_for_national.html
It fits with their actions in the campaign, and is consistent with
past National behaviour towards "support parties." Let us hope they
see those recommendations as worth following!
Both you and DPF appear to ignore what to me is the most obvious goal
- increase your party-vote support by 6% or so and govern alone. That
might be a big ask while English remains as Parliamentary leader but
it is not impossible.
On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 15:56:42 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 00:21:25 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sat, 21 Oct 2017 14:08:17 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:Your conjecture on English's personal credibility and National's
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 09:45:33 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 16:02:08 +1300, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
On Wed, 18 Oct 2017 14:13:23 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com> >>>>>>wrote:
On Thursday, 19 October 2017 09:38:01 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
Even Smalley who has consistently been favourable to National knows >>>>>>>> that they are very weak:
http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/on-air/early-edition/opinion/rachel-smalley-what-happens-if-national-loses
If NZ First does not choose National, then I predict English will >>>>>>>> offer his resignation but it will not be accepted for a few weeks. She >>>>>>>> rightly identifies Joyce and Brownlee as the obvious bully-boys - they >>>>>>>> stand out in a party of bullies, but Joyce in particular would be out >>>>>>>> because of his big lie over the so-called tax hole.
To get to seriously suggest Tolley, Kaye or Bridges as potential >>>>>>>> replacements for English is a sign that National would have serious >>>>>>>> problems if they are chosen by NZ First - who would themselves have at >>>>>>>> least four people who would make better Ministers than National have >>>>>>>> available.
That could be one area where National's relative weakness with respect >>>>>>>> to competence could make them a more attractive partner for NZ First - >>>>>>>> NZ First Ministers in a NZ FIrst / National government would have >>>>>>>> greater influence through competence alone than in a better balanced >>>>>>>> Labour/NZ1/Green government. Either way, National have a major >>>>>>>> rebuilding job to do.
Actually the speculation started about 3 weeks ago - you're especially slow on the uptake.
But it is kinda funny to see you criticise the leadership options for National when Labour have a last gasp leader who's only ever lead a ... actually nothing?
Preferred prime minister is not the same issue as competency as a >>>>>>Minister of the Crown. For preferred PM, clearly Bill English has the >>>>>>advantage of current tenure and having been visible for a long time, >>>>>>yet Jacinda Ardern had roughly equal preferred PM ranking as Bill - >>>>>>and way ahead of any prospective Natonal replacement for English..
For estimated competency as Ministers, clearly few Labour MPs have >>>>>>practical expereience, but we do know that many National Minisers have >>>>>>been found severely wanting, whereas a number of Labour MPs have shown >>>>>>well in contrast. For example Grant Robertson has shown more >>>>>>competency in Finance than Joyce - who not only can't read accounts >>>>>>but lies . . . Read the article for comments on others.
Now we have suggestions from National supporters that Bill English >>>>>should stay as leader of the Opposition for at least a year. The "big >>>>>lie" discredits English and Joyce from being leader in an election, >>>>>but the rest of National is either discredited by the same >>>>>incompetence or dishonesty, or has too little experience. It is a >>>>>real problem for National, because Bill English has lost the >>>>>credibility he use to have, and they have no-one else.
National got what percentage of the party vote? How was any >>>>credibility lost with that result?
I was referring to his personal credibility, Crash. Despite English
being clearly invovled in much of the "dirty tricks"behaviour from >>>National, the party tried hard to protect the reputation of both Key
and subsequently English - the spin fed to the nedia was that English
may be rather dull , but that he was essentially honest. The veneer >>>protecting that reputation was destroyed by his public support for the >>>"big lie" of the 11 bn so-called "hole" - it became clear that he was >>>donkey-deep in the pooh of National's deliberate deceptive behaviour.
He now has no credibility as being at all trustworthy or believeable.
behaviour during the election campaign is clearly not supported by the >>large number of voters who party-voted National. If what you say were
to have any credibility that party-vote support should have
evaporated. It did not.
The Government that Labour and Jacinda Ardern lead has 55 seats (of >>>>120) - Labour with 46 and NZF with 9. There is a
confidence-and-supply agreement with the Greens with 8 seats that
gives Ardern a majority of 3.
In opposition we have National (56 seats) and ACT (1 seat).
National had their credibility confirmed by this result. This is our >>>>first Parliament where the party that gained the largest number of >>>>seats (56 - substantially more than Labour, next on 46) is the >>>>Opposition. National get their support from shallow pragmatism rather >>>>than visionary conviction.
NZF has only ever been in a coalition government once (1996-1998) so
it did not last a full term. If there is future tension between
Labour and NZF (inevitable from time to time), perhaps Peters sees >>>>Ardern's inexperience as a leader as an attribute that can be >>>>exploited.
All irrelevant - so far at least the partnership seems to be working >>>well.
Really? It has not actually started yet and history gives a good
indicator on what might be to come. Remember that Winston entered >>Parliament in 1977 - 3 years or so before Adern was born. Winston
does not do courtesy - he could not even be bothered to call Adern or >>English before announcing his decision last Thursday.
On the other hand, look at what National's pollster recommends to >>>National:
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2017/10/goals_for_national.html
It fits with their actions in the campaign, and is consistent with
past National behaviour towards "support parties." Let us hope they
see those recommendations as worth following!
Both you and DPF appear to ignore what to me is the most obvious goal
- increase your party-vote support by 6% or so and govern alone. That >>might be a big ask while English remains as Parliamentary leader but
it is not impossible.
I think that is exactly what Farrar is recommending - National can't
work with anyone, so recognise that and burn off any potential
partners. I hope your "obvious goal" is shared by National, Crash.
National can't work with anyone'? What bullshit Rich. The last NINE yearsprove you've been overdoing the pot or cooking sherry again! It's Labour who because of their ignoring of Maori concerns caused it's Maori caucus to abandon
Pooh
On 10/23/2017 5:24 PM, Pooh wrote:prove you've been overdoing the pot or cooking sherry again! It's Labour who because of their ignoring of Maori concerns caused it's Maori caucus to abandon
National can't work with anyone'? What bullshit Rich. The last NINE years
Pooh
And today we find out what baubles liebor gave to Peters for his support
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
On 10/19/2017 6:07 PM, JohnO wrote:
Not taking about leading polls you dummy. I mean leading an organisation, business or enterprise.
Jacinda worked in a fish and chip shop but as far as I know she didn't manage it.
Robertson is the puppet master there.
Watch who stands immediately behind her at any 'news' event
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >https://www.avast.com/antivirus
On 10/23/2017 5:24 PM, Pooh wrote:prove you've been overdoing the pot or cooking sherry again! It's Labour who because of their ignoring of Maori concerns caused it's Maori caucus to abandon
National can't work with anyone'? What bullshit Rich. The last NINE years
Pooh
And today we find out what baubles liebor gave to Peters for his support
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
george152 <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote:business or enterprise.
On 10/19/2017 6:07 PM, JohnO wrote:
Not taking about leading polls you dummy. I mean leading an organisation,
manage it.Jacinda worked in a fish and chip shop but as far as I know she didn't
Robertson is the puppet master there.
Watch who stands immediately behind her at any 'news' event
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. >https://www.avast.com/antivirus
I suspect that Helen Clark will be the Taxcinda's puppet master. PM
by proxy
On Tuesday, October 24, 2017 at 7:58:55 AM UTC+13, george wrote:the Uncle Toms and
On 10/23/2017 5:24 PM, Pooh wrote:
National can't work with anyone'? What bullshit Rich. The last NINE years prove you've been overdoing the pot or cooking sherry again! It's Labour who because of their ignoring of Maori concerns caused it's Maori caucus to abandon
It'll be more of a surprise and a damn sight more pleasant one :)And today we find out what baubles liebor gave to Peters for his support
Pooh
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
I'm more interested in the results for 'bird of the year'(feathered variety'.
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 31 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 188:55:15 |
| Calls: | 2,082 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 11,137 |
| Messages: | 947,676 |