A good summary of the situation.It is inexpert opinion with clear political undertones. The biggest issue that the so called opposition cannot bring themselves to acknowledge and you simply do not understand is that this government has done a better than passable job of steering us through an international crisis and crippling earthquake damage costs. The small minded idiots that believe in "my party right or wrong" do this country damage every day!
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my-beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my-beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
On Sunday, 4 December 2016 15:36:33 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:opinion article?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my-beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
Is this the same Dickbot who had a moan this morning because someone posted an
Why yes it is, and here it is the very same day posting an... opinion article!
What a fucking hypocrite.
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 04:28:17 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my- >beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that Mr Key >got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks victory isI am sure that there are many die-hard National supporters who will
holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good but I don't think >that makes a general election victory."
indeed any post hoc opinion that spouts from John Key - but there will equally be many that agree with that well known lefty Audrey Young
(despite family links to National):
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11759981
"The Mt Roskill byelection victory is Andrew Little's victory.
The Labour leader has described the win as "a bloody nose for
National".
It is more like a bloody nose, a black eye and broken jaw.
National was comprehensively thrashed in a fight that had the
potential to run closer, given that National polled 2189 votes higher
than Labour in the party vote two years ago.
John Key campaigned just as hard, if not harder in the electorate,
because an upset result would have destabilised Little's leadership at
a critical time in the election cycle.
Key campaigned for seven days in the electorate, between earthquake management and international sumiteering in Peru.
Andrew Little was there for six days.
Little had a rough week with the defection of Nick Leggett to National
and some dubious polling results.
Credible polling still puts Labour in with a chance in a centre-left
bloc to lead the next Government but there has been nothing in Little repertoire until now that says "winner".
Even a close win in Mt Roskill would have been further fuel for a
Little destabilisation campaign.
Wood's emphatic win will transform the spirits of the party and the
general electorate over the summer break and Little's image as a
winner.
Since Little's own election as leader two years ago, Mt Roskill is his
first victory.
Labour did not campaign to win in the Northland byelection last year,
to give Winston Peters a better chance, which he won.
Byelections usually return the same party, but there have been enough
rogue results to never take them for granted.
In the 40 byelections that have been held in the past 60 years, seats
have changed parties six times - although only once in the nine
byelections since MMP 20 years ago: Peters in Northland (not counting
when the same MP wins their old seat under a new party such as Hone
Harawira going from Maori to Mana).
Michael Wood's majority of 6518 is all the more impressive because it
is not far off that of Phil Goff's majority last election of 8091.
It is a win he should savour personally but a win his leader
desperately needed. "
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:I am sure that there are many die-hard National supporters who will
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my- >beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that Mr Key
got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks victory is
holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good but I don't think
that makes a general election victory."
On Sunday, 4 December 2016 19:34:07 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:that on the headlines.
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 04:28:17 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:I am sure that there are many die-hard National supporters who will
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my-beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that Mr Key >> >got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks victory is
holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good but I don't think
that makes a general election victory."
indeed any post hoc opinion that spouts from John Key - but there will
equally be many that agree with that well known lefty Audrey Young
(despite family links to National):
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11759981
"The Mt Roskill byelection victory is Andrew Little's victory.
The Labour leader has described the win as "a bloody nose for
National".
It is more like a bloody nose, a black eye and broken jaw.
National was comprehensively thrashed in a fight that had the
potential to run closer, given that National polled 2189 votes higher
than Labour in the party vote two years ago.
John Key campaigned just as hard, if not harder in the electorate,
because an upset result would have destabilised Little's leadership at
a critical time in the election cycle.
Key campaigned for seven days in the electorate, between earthquake
management and international sumiteering in Peru.
Andrew Little was there for six days.
Little had a rough week with the defection of Nick Leggett to National
and some dubious polling results.
Credible polling still puts Labour in with a chance in a centre-left
bloc to lead the next Government but there has been nothing in Little
repertoire until now that says "winner".
Even a close win in Mt Roskill would have been further fuel for a
Little destabilisation campaign.
Wood's emphatic win will transform the spirits of the party and the
general electorate over the summer break and Little's image as a
winner.
Since Little's own election as leader two years ago, Mt Roskill is his
first victory.
Labour did not campaign to win in the Northland byelection last year,
to give Winston Peters a better chance, which he won.
Byelections usually return the same party, but there have been enough
rogue results to never take them for granted.
In the 40 byelections that have been held in the past 60 years, seats
have changed parties six times - although only once in the nine
byelections since MMP 20 years ago: Peters in Northland (not counting
when the same MP wins their old seat under a new party such as Hone
Harawira going from Maori to Mana).
Michael Wood's majority of 6518 is all the more impressive because it
is not far off that of Phil Goff's majority last election of 8091.
It is a win he should savour personally but a win his leader
desperately needed. "
Well, Labour managed to retain the very seat they've held for about 60 years, in a 25% turnout, in a result that changed nothing.
And they're cock-a-hoop.
Well they would be. Looks a lot better than the last couple of national polls that have them at 23-38% isn't it. I think they are mostly relieved to not have
On Sat, 3 Dec 2016 22:56:28 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>my-
wrote:
On Sunday, 4 December 2016 19:34:07 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 04:28:17 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-
beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisisI am sure that there are many die-hard National supporters who will
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that Mr
Key got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks victory
is holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good but I don't
think that makes a general election victory."
indeed any post hoc opinion that spouts from John Key - but there will
equally be many that agree with that well known lefty Audrey Young
(despite family links to National):
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11759981
"The Mt Roskill byelection victory is Andrew Little's victory.
The Labour leader has described the win as "a bloody nose for
National".
It is more like a bloody nose, a black eye and broken jaw.
National was comprehensively thrashed in a fight that had the
potential to run closer, given that National polled 2189 votes higher
than Labour in the party vote two years ago.
John Key campaigned just as hard, if not harder in the electorate,
because an upset result would have destabilised Little's leadership at
a critical time in the election cycle.
Key campaigned for seven days in the electorate, between earthquake
management and international sumiteering in Peru.
Andrew Little was there for six days.
Little had a rough week with the defection of Nick Leggett to National
and some dubious polling results.
Credible polling still puts Labour in with a chance in a centre-left
bloc to lead the next Government but there has been nothing in Little
repertoire until now that says "winner".
Even a close win in Mt Roskill would have been further fuel for a
Little destabilisation campaign.
Wood's emphatic win will transform the spirits of the party and the
general electorate over the summer break and Little's image as a
winner.
Since Little's own election as leader two years ago, Mt Roskill is his
first victory.
Labour did not campaign to win in the Northland byelection last year,
to give Winston Peters a better chance, which he won.
Byelections usually return the same party, but there have been enough
rogue results to never take them for granted.
In the 40 byelections that have been held in the past 60 years, seats
have changed parties six times - although only once in the nine
byelections since MMP 20 years ago: Peters in Northland (not counting
when the same MP wins their old seat under a new party such as Hone
Harawira going from Maori to Mana).
Michael Wood's majority of 6518 is all the more impressive because it
is not far off that of Phil Goff's majority last election of 8091.
It is a win he should savour personally but a win his leader
desperately needed. "
Well, Labour managed to retain the very seat they've held for about 60 >>years, in a 25% turnout, in a result that changed nothing.
And they're cock-a-hoop.
Well they would be. Looks a lot better than the last couple of national >>polls that have them at 23-38% isn't it. I think they are mostly
relieved to not have that on the headlines.
Absolutely. The housing issue that started this thread has been
mentioned in the analysis: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11760271
"We were incredibly pleased by the fact that the support is so
widespread. Places like Maungawhau where Labour has traditionally come
second to National, we won 58 per cent of the vote.
"Royal Oak Primary, a booth that we have never, ever won before
according to 30-year veterans of Labour campaigns around here, we won.
I just think that comes down to widespread concern in the community
about those key issues of housing, transport and crime."
. . . . .
Wood said he believed the policies he campaigned on - crime, housing affordability and transport - had struck a chord, and Labour had put up
a big ground game, including about 300-400 people on the ground on
election day.
. . . . .
Wood's performance was dominant even at voting booths in
National-leaning suburbs such as on the edges of Mt Eden, and Parmar
only won one of 22 booths - the Epsom Methodist Church (139 votes to
103).
Wood won booths such as Maungawhau Primary School on the edge of Mt Eden
(498 to Parmar's 319 votes) and Royal Oak Intermediate (434 to 213).
In Mt Roskill proper National voters were scarce, including Hay Park
School (577 to 108) and Wesley Primary (262 votes to 7 for Parmar).
In the 2014 general election, Parmar won booths against long-serving MP
Phil Goff, including Maungawhau Primary and Royal Oak Primary."
_________________________________
I suspect that Mt Roskill will not be the only part of the country
concerned about husing, transport and crime . . .
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my-beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that Mr Key
got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks victory is
holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good but I don't think
that makes a general election victory."
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 22:29:21 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sat, 3 Dec 2016 22:56:28 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 4 December 2016 19:34:07 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 04:28:17 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:I am sure that there are many die-hard National supporters who will
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold- >my-beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt >>>> >> Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that Mr >>>> >Key got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks victory
is holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good but I don't
think that makes a general election victory."
indeed any post hoc opinion that spouts from John Key - but there will >>>> equally be many that agree with that well known lefty Audrey Young
(despite family links to National):
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11759981 >>>>
"The Mt Roskill byelection victory is Andrew Little's victory.
The Labour leader has described the win as "a bloody nose for
National".
It is more like a bloody nose, a black eye and broken jaw.
National was comprehensively thrashed in a fight that had the
potential to run closer, given that National polled 2189 votes higher
than Labour in the party vote two years ago.
John Key campaigned just as hard, if not harder in the electorate,
because an upset result would have destabilised Little's leadership at >>>> a critical time in the election cycle.
Key campaigned for seven days in the electorate, between earthquake
management and international sumiteering in Peru.
Andrew Little was there for six days.
Little had a rough week with the defection of Nick Leggett to National >>>> and some dubious polling results.
Credible polling still puts Labour in with a chance in a centre-left
bloc to lead the next Government but there has been nothing in Little
repertoire until now that says "winner".
Even a close win in Mt Roskill would have been further fuel for a
Little destabilisation campaign.
Wood's emphatic win will transform the spirits of the party and the
general electorate over the summer break and Little's image as a
winner.
Since Little's own election as leader two years ago, Mt Roskill is his >>>> first victory.
Labour did not campaign to win in the Northland byelection last year,
to give Winston Peters a better chance, which he won.
Byelections usually return the same party, but there have been enough
rogue results to never take them for granted.
In the 40 byelections that have been held in the past 60 years, seats
have changed parties six times - although only once in the nine
byelections since MMP 20 years ago: Peters in Northland (not counting
when the same MP wins their old seat under a new party such as Hone
Harawira going from Maori to Mana).
Michael Wood's majority of 6518 is all the more impressive because it
is not far off that of Phil Goff's majority last election of 8091.
It is a win he should savour personally but a win his leader
desperately needed. "
Well, Labour managed to retain the very seat they've held for about 60 >>>years, in a 25% turnout, in a result that changed nothing.
And they're cock-a-hoop.
Well they would be. Looks a lot better than the last couple of national >>>polls that have them at 23-38% isn't it. I think they are mostly
relieved to not have that on the headlines.
Absolutely. The housing issue that started this thread has been
mentioned in the analysis:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11760271
"We were incredibly pleased by the fact that the support is so
widespread. Places like Maungawhau where Labour has traditionally come
second to National, we won 58 per cent of the vote.
"Royal Oak Primary, a booth that we have never, ever won before
according to 30-year veterans of Labour campaigns around here, we won.
I just think that comes down to widespread concern in the community
about those key issues of housing, transport and crime."
. . . . .
Wood said he believed the policies he campaigned on - crime, housing
affordability and transport - had struck a chord, and Labour had put up
a big ground game, including about 300-400 people on the ground on
election day.
. . . . .
Wood's performance was dominant even at voting booths in
National-leaning suburbs such as on the edges of Mt Eden, and Parmar
only won one of 22 booths - the Epsom Methodist Church (139 votes to
103).
Wood won booths such as Maungawhau Primary School on the edge of Mt Eden
(498 to Parmar's 319 votes) and Royal Oak Intermediate (434 to 213).
In Mt Roskill proper National voters were scarce, including Hay Park
School (577 to 108) and Wesley Primary (262 votes to 7 for Parmar).
In the 2014 general election, Parmar won booths against long-serving MP
Phil Goff, including Maungawhau Primary and Royal Oak Primary."
_________________________________
I suspect that Mt Roskill will not be the only part of the country
concerned about husing, transport and crime . . .
You can indulge in all the wild-assed speculation you like, but the fact >remains that the win was expected; that it changes nothing; and that
partisan concern for the issues you name is not showing up in national >polling.
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 10:49:21 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:hold-
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 22:29:21 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sat, 3 Dec 2016 22:56:28 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 4 December 2016 19:34:07 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 04:28:17 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-
c_id=1&objectid=11759981my-
beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisisI am sure that there are many die-hard National supporters who will
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of
Mt Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that
Mr Key got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks
victory is holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good
but I don't think that makes a general election victory."
indeed any post hoc opinion that spouts from John Key - but there
will equally be many that agree with that well known lefty Audrey
Young (despite family links to National):
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?
"The Mt Roskill byelection victory is Andrew Little's victory.
The Labour leader has described the win as "a bloody nose for
National".
It is more like a bloody nose, a black eye and broken jaw.
National was comprehensively thrashed in a fight that had the
potential to run closer, given that National polled 2189 votes
higher than Labour in the party vote two years ago.
John Key campaigned just as hard, if not harder in the electorate,
because an upset result would have destabilised Little's leadership
at a critical time in the election cycle.
Key campaigned for seven days in the electorate, between earthquake
management and international sumiteering in Peru.
Andrew Little was there for six days.
Little had a rough week with the defection of Nick Leggett to
National and some dubious polling results.
Credible polling still puts Labour in with a chance in a centre-left >>>>> bloc to lead the next Government but there has been nothing in
Little repertoire until now that says "winner".
Even a close win in Mt Roskill would have been further fuel for a
Little destabilisation campaign.
Wood's emphatic win will transform the spirits of the party and the
general electorate over the summer break and Little's image as a
winner.
Since Little's own election as leader two years ago, Mt Roskill is
his first victory.
Labour did not campaign to win in the Northland byelection last
year, to give Winston Peters a better chance, which he won.
Byelections usually return the same party, but there have been
enough rogue results to never take them for granted.
In the 40 byelections that have been held in the past 60 years,
seats have changed parties six times - although only once in the
nine byelections since MMP 20 years ago: Peters in Northland (not
counting when the same MP wins their old seat under a new party such >>>>> as Hone Harawira going from Maori to Mana).
Michael Wood's majority of 6518 is all the more impressive because
it is not far off that of Phil Goff's majority last election of
8091.
It is a win he should savour personally but a win his leader
desperately needed. "
Well, Labour managed to retain the very seat they've held for about 60 >>>>years, in a 25% turnout, in a result that changed nothing.
And they're cock-a-hoop.
Well they would be. Looks a lot better than the last couple of
national polls that have them at 23-38% isn't it. I think they are >>>>mostly relieved to not have that on the headlines.
Absolutely. The housing issue that started this thread has been
mentioned in the analysis:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11760271
"We were incredibly pleased by the fact that the support is so
widespread. Places like Maungawhau where Labour has traditionally come
second to National, we won 58 per cent of the vote.
"Royal Oak Primary, a booth that we have never, ever won before
according to 30-year veterans of Labour campaigns around here, we won.
I just think that comes down to widespread concern in the community
about those key issues of housing, transport and crime."
. . . . .
Wood said he believed the policies he campaigned on - crime, housing
affordability and transport - had struck a chord, and Labour had put
up a big ground game, including about 300-400 people on the ground on
election day.
. . . . .
Wood's performance was dominant even at voting booths in
National-leaning suburbs such as on the edges of Mt Eden, and Parmar
only won one of 22 booths - the Epsom Methodist Church (139 votes to
103).
Wood won booths such as Maungawhau Primary School on the edge of Mt
Eden (498 to Parmar's 319 votes) and Royal Oak Intermediate (434 to
213).
In Mt Roskill proper National voters were scarce, including Hay Park
School (577 to 108) and Wesley Primary (262 votes to 7 for Parmar).
In the 2014 general election, Parmar won booths against long-serving
MP Phil Goff, including Maungawhau Primary and Royal Oak Primary."
_________________________________
I suspect that Mt Roskill will not be the only part of the country
concerned about husing, transport and crime . . .
You can indulge in all the wild-assed speculation you like, but the fact >>remains that the win was expected; that it changes nothing; and that >>partisan concern for the issues you name is not showing up in national >>polling.
I'm not sure if you mean National Party polling or national polling, and
I haven't seen any such reports - perhaps you could enlighten us as to
just what issues are of concern. Crude "scorecard' polling of voter intentions could be said to cover all issues withut identifying what
those issues are.
There certainly was speculation that National may be able to win the
seat - with a popular long term MP having left, and a seat where
National won the party vote last time, and with the electorate being
just the sort of people that often provide National with solid support,
they were certainly hoping for their candidate to win; the National
Party leader spent more time in the electorate campaigning than the
Labour leader.
On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 07:56:18 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:Sarcasm is his stock-in-trade, he can't help himself.
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 10:49:21 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey <nobody@nowhere.com>hold-
wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 22:29:21 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sat, 3 Dec 2016 22:56:28 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 4 December 2016 19:34:07 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 04:28:17 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-
c_id=1&objectid=11759981my-
beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisisI am sure that there are many die-hard National supporters who will >>>>>> indeed any post hoc opinion that spouts from John Key - but there
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of >>>>>> >> Mt Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that >>>>>> >Mr Key got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks
victory is holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good
but I don't think that makes a general election victory."
will equally be many that agree with that well known lefty Audrey
Young (despite family links to National):
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?
Silly sod. I had toyed with the idea of adding the tag (small 'n'), but >figured you were intelligent enough to read the context and conclude I
"The Mt Roskill byelection victory is Andrew Little's victory.
The Labour leader has described the win as "a bloody nose for
National".
It is more like a bloody nose, a black eye and broken jaw.
National was comprehensively thrashed in a fight that had the
potential to run closer, given that National polled 2189 votes
higher than Labour in the party vote two years ago.
John Key campaigned just as hard, if not harder in the electorate, >>>>>> because an upset result would have destabilised Little's leadership >>>>>> at a critical time in the election cycle.
Key campaigned for seven days in the electorate, between earthquake >>>>>> management and international sumiteering in Peru.
Andrew Little was there for six days.
Little had a rough week with the defection of Nick Leggett to
National and some dubious polling results.
Credible polling still puts Labour in with a chance in a centre-left >>>>>> bloc to lead the next Government but there has been nothing in
Little repertoire until now that says "winner".
Even a close win in Mt Roskill would have been further fuel for a
Little destabilisation campaign.
Wood's emphatic win will transform the spirits of the party and the >>>>>> general electorate over the summer break and Little's image as a
winner.
Since Little's own election as leader two years ago, Mt Roskill is >>>>>> his first victory.
Labour did not campaign to win in the Northland byelection last
year, to give Winston Peters a better chance, which he won.
Byelections usually return the same party, but there have been
enough rogue results to never take them for granted.
In the 40 byelections that have been held in the past 60 years,
seats have changed parties six times - although only once in the
nine byelections since MMP 20 years ago: Peters in Northland (not
counting when the same MP wins their old seat under a new party such >>>>>> as Hone Harawira going from Maori to Mana).
Michael Wood's majority of 6518 is all the more impressive because >>>>>> it is not far off that of Phil Goff's majority last election of
8091.
It is a win he should savour personally but a win his leader
desperately needed. "
Well, Labour managed to retain the very seat they've held for about 60 >>>>>years, in a 25% turnout, in a result that changed nothing.
And they're cock-a-hoop.
Well they would be. Looks a lot better than the last couple of >>>>>national polls that have them at 23-38% isn't it. I think they are >>>>>mostly relieved to not have that on the headlines.
Absolutely. The housing issue that started this thread has been
mentioned in the analysis:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11760271 >>>>
"We were incredibly pleased by the fact that the support is so
widespread. Places like Maungawhau where Labour has traditionally come >>>> second to National, we won 58 per cent of the vote.
"Royal Oak Primary, a booth that we have never, ever won before
according to 30-year veterans of Labour campaigns around here, we won. >>>> I just think that comes down to widespread concern in the community
about those key issues of housing, transport and crime."
. . . . .
Wood said he believed the policies he campaigned on - crime, housing
affordability and transport - had struck a chord, and Labour had put
up a big ground game, including about 300-400 people on the ground on
election day.
. . . . .
Wood's performance was dominant even at voting booths in
National-leaning suburbs such as on the edges of Mt Eden, and Parmar
only won one of 22 booths - the Epsom Methodist Church (139 votes to
103).
Wood won booths such as Maungawhau Primary School on the edge of Mt
Eden (498 to Parmar's 319 votes) and Royal Oak Intermediate (434 to
213).
In Mt Roskill proper National voters were scarce, including Hay Park
School (577 to 108) and Wesley Primary (262 votes to 7 for Parmar).
In the 2014 general election, Parmar won booths against long-serving
MP Phil Goff, including Maungawhau Primary and Royal Oak Primary."
_________________________________
I suspect that Mt Roskill will not be the only part of the country
concerned about husing, transport and crime . . .
You can indulge in all the wild-assed speculation you like, but the fact >>>remains that the win was expected; that it changes nothing; and that >>>partisan concern for the issues you name is not showing up in national >>>polling.
I'm not sure if you mean National Party polling or national polling, and
I haven't seen any such reports - perhaps you could enlighten us as to
just what issues are of concern. Crude "scorecard' polling of voter
intentions could be said to cover all issues withut identifying what
those issues are.
did not mean 'N'. Sadly I overestimated your grasp.
There certainly was speculation that National may be able to win the
seat - with a popular long term MP having left, and a seat where
National won the party vote last time, and with the electorate being
just the sort of people that often provide National with solid support,
they were certainly hoping for their candidate to win; the National
Party leader spent more time in the electorate campaigning than the
Labour leader.
Try this:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/87188948/What-a-by- >election-win-really-means
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my-beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my-beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-my-beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisis
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt
Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that Mr Key
got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks victory is
holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good but I don't think
that makes a general election victory."
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 10:49:21 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 22:29:21 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sat, 3 Dec 2016 22:56:28 -0800 (PST), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>my-
wrote:
On Sunday, 4 December 2016 19:34:07 UTC+13, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 04:28:17 -0000 (UTC), HitAnyKey
<nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
On Sun, 04 Dec 2016 15:36:30 +1300, Rich80105 wrote:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/property/87122221/david-slack-hold-
beer-while-i-fix-this-housing-crisisI am sure that there are many die-hard National supporters who will
A good summary of the situation.
We can have a government that is not a spectator - the voters of Mt >>>>>>> Roskill have shown the way.
You really are an insufferable git. I'm sure many would agree that Mr >>>>>> Key got it about right when he said "If Andrew Little thinks victory >>>>>> is holding a seat they've held for 40 years, that's good but I don't >>>>>> think that makes a general election victory."
indeed any post hoc opinion that spouts from John Key - but there will >>>>> equally be many that agree with that well known lefty Audrey Young
(despite family links to National):
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11759981 >>>>>
"The Mt Roskill byelection victory is Andrew Little's victory.
The Labour leader has described the win as "a bloody nose for
National".
It is more like a bloody nose, a black eye and broken jaw.
National was comprehensively thrashed in a fight that had the
potential to run closer, given that National polled 2189 votes higher >>>>> than Labour in the party vote two years ago.
John Key campaigned just as hard, if not harder in the electorate,
because an upset result would have destabilised Little's leadership at >>>>> a critical time in the election cycle.
Key campaigned for seven days in the electorate, between earthquake
management and international sumiteering in Peru.
Andrew Little was there for six days.
Little had a rough week with the defection of Nick Leggett to National >>>>> and some dubious polling results.
Credible polling still puts Labour in with a chance in a centre-left >>>>> bloc to lead the next Government but there has been nothing in Little >>>>> repertoire until now that says "winner".
Even a close win in Mt Roskill would have been further fuel for a
Little destabilisation campaign.
Wood's emphatic win will transform the spirits of the party and the
general electorate over the summer break and Little's image as a
winner.
Since Little's own election as leader two years ago, Mt Roskill is his >>>>> first victory.
Labour did not campaign to win in the Northland byelection last year, >>>>> to give Winston Peters a better chance, which he won.
Byelections usually return the same party, but there have been enough >>>>> rogue results to never take them for granted.
In the 40 byelections that have been held in the past 60 years, seats >>>>> have changed parties six times - although only once in the nine
byelections since MMP 20 years ago: Peters in Northland (not counting >>>>> when the same MP wins their old seat under a new party such as Hone
Harawira going from Maori to Mana).
Michael Wood's majority of 6518 is all the more impressive because it >>>>> is not far off that of Phil Goff's majority last election of 8091.
It is a win he should savour personally but a win his leader
desperately needed. "
Well, Labour managed to retain the very seat they've held for about 60 >>>> years, in a 25% turnout, in a result that changed nothing.
And they're cock-a-hoop.
Well they would be. Looks a lot better than the last couple of national >>>> polls that have them at 23-38% isn't it. I think they are mostly
relieved to not have that on the headlines.
Absolutely. The housing issue that started this thread has been
mentioned in the analysis:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11760271
"We were incredibly pleased by the fact that the support is so
widespread. Places like Maungawhau where Labour has traditionally come
second to National, we won 58 per cent of the vote.
"Royal Oak Primary, a booth that we have never, ever won before
according to 30-year veterans of Labour campaigns around here, we won.
I just think that comes down to widespread concern in the community
about those key issues of housing, transport and crime."
. . . . .
Wood said he believed the policies he campaigned on - crime, housing
affordability and transport - had struck a chord, and Labour had put up
a big ground game, including about 300-400 people on the ground on
election day.
. . . . .
Wood's performance was dominant even at voting booths in
National-leaning suburbs such as on the edges of Mt Eden, and Parmar
only won one of 22 booths - the Epsom Methodist Church (139 votes to
103).
Wood won booths such as Maungawhau Primary School on the edge of Mt Eden >>> (498 to Parmar's 319 votes) and Royal Oak Intermediate (434 to 213).
In Mt Roskill proper National voters were scarce, including Hay Park
School (577 to 108) and Wesley Primary (262 votes to 7 for Parmar).
In the 2014 general election, Parmar won booths against long-serving MP
Phil Goff, including Maungawhau Primary and Royal Oak Primary."
_________________________________
I suspect that Mt Roskill will not be the only part of the country
concerned about husing, transport and crime . . .
You can indulge in all the wild-assed speculation you like, but the fact
remains that the win was expected; that it changes nothing; and that
partisan concern for the issues you name is not showing up in national
polling.
I'm not sure if you mean National Party polling or national polling,
and I haven't seen any such reports - perhaps you could enlighten us
as to just what issues are of concern. Crude "scorecard' polling of
voter intentions could be said to cover all issues withut identifying
what those issues are.
There certainly was speculation that National may be able to win the
seat - with a popular long term MP having left, and a seat where
National won the party vote last time, and with the electorate being
just the sort of people that often provide National with solid
support, they were certainly hoping for their candidate to win; the
National Party leader spent more time in the electorate campaigning
than the Labour leader.
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 2 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 75:38:07 |
| Calls: | 2,119 |
| Files: | 11,149 |
| D/L today: |
45 files (9,960K bytes) |
| Messages: | 950,589 |