…and not coincidentally, impress previously uninformed posters as to the correctness of their side of the argument.
I don’t count myself as that uninformed, I might add. As soon as I saw the words “radical Maori caucus” I knew exactly where Ferris was coming from, and that their entire post could be safely dismissed on the accuracy front.
Another possibility is that we may give a lot more weight to some of the good things (like increased representation in his gov.) than Americans or even Canadians might. That may sound similar to “overrepresent”, but it’s not, really.
I guess I’m not the only one to see something in common. But Trudeau has plenty of gas…
…Jacinda Ardern’s last speech as Prime Minister at Ratana.
Reviving this thread to note that the Labor Party under Ardern’s successor got trounced today in the New Zealand general election. The center-right National Party will likely partner with the more libertarian ACT Party to form a government on a platform of cutting taxes and spending and “restoring law and order.”
Disappointing. But also not surprising, as Left-wing Parties across the globe seem to be unwilling to take charge and make dynamic decisions when they are needed. They just seem so lacklustre and limp, trying too hard to be liked.
‘Trounced’ is about right. Labour had an outright parliamentary majority three years ago and have pretty much lost half that support to end up at around 27% (preliminary results).
I got some stick for pointing out that Jacinda Ardern wasn’t the wonderful Prime Minister that her overseas image would suggest, but last night’s result is simply a reflection of how the majority of New Zealanders have been feeling about her legacy these last three years.
Here’s a link to enjoy:
https://laboursfailures.com/
…Jacinda Ardern lead a government that saved 20,000 lives. She was subjected to one of the worst harassment and disinformation campaigns that I’ve seen in my lifetime. And she wasn’t in the running last night. If you voted for Luxon or if you voted for Seymour or if you voted for Peters, then own that. Own what will happen to people like me over the next few years.
And just a warning to everyone: the link Ferris provided is to an astroturf site that contains disinformation, has no contact information, hides their WHOIS information, and harvests emails. I doubt that it is dangerous. But it is nothing but propaganda.
Yeah… i will own Luxon, but i reject Peters as a xenophobic, populist pratt only marginally better than trump.
No GST on fruit n vege is dumb.
No interest deductibility is dumb.
Jacinda and covid management was awesome.
Happy to ‘own’ voting for a party (not a person - hey! That might be a clue as to why voting on personality isn’t a good idea) that consistently ran on their policies rather than Labour’s fear-mongering and personal attacks.
Of ACT’s eleven MP’s, I’ve met and had conversations with five of them personally (including the leader and deputy leader), and another three online. Despite being busy people, I do get replies from them. I have no idea what you mean by ‘what will happen to people like me’, but I know that those eleven elected MP’s will consider you just like the other five million Kiwis and treat you equally. They are excellent representatives for all New Zealanders.
Perhaps you’ll ‘own’ some of Labour’s appalling economic and social failings, but it really doesn’t matter - the fact is that Labour couldn’t act fast enough to chuck out the unpopular policies that Jacinda Ardern had been pushing, and then never referred to her again in the campaign. There’s a good reason for that.
I happen to share the disdain for Winston Peters - always the populist - so am still a little nervous about his potential influence. Hopefully a stable and competent National/ACT government will get on with undoing some of the damage left by Labour.
Agree re: Peters.
Funny how Labour’s Finance Minister said the same thing about GST… up until it was suddenly Labour policy. And he’s the same guy that wanted a wealth tax - but since his own leader chucked the idea, he had to suck it up and talk it down again. Talk about consistency!
…yep. There is a good reason why people keep bringing up Jacinda Ardern, even though she played no part in either the election campaign or the loss. She didn’t lose this election. This is what won the election.
Its no wonder disinformation sites like “laboursfailures” exist.
Outsider here, but at the time I she stepped down I was reading of reports of how low her popularity and Labor support had become. Similar to this one:
Was that persistent decline the result of opposition disinformation or the voters’ dissatisfaction with high inflation, lower home values, higher crime, and social issues?
Her successor stepped into a freefalling situation. Did not salvage it to be sure but it seems to an outside read disingenuous to divorce her administration from the circumstance.
Honestly, as an American I look at that chart and wonder why Labor’s fundraising was so shitty.
Note that the chart is limited to only very large donations. The fatcats and the corps made every donation in that chart.
We don’t know how the total donations from all sources including ordinary people came out. But we can see which outcome the landed gentry paid for. And in fact they seem to not only have paid for it, but also gotten it.
The election results would suggest that this particular left-wing party is no longer liked because of the dynamic decisions that it made. During the last few years, the party made quite a few decisions with vim and vigor. If the populace had liked those decisions, surely they would have kept the party in power.
…it isn’t that difficult to understand. Rich people gave lots of money to the parties that would make them richer. An enormous amount of money was poured into this campaign, along with an unprecedented amount of dark money that was spent on astro-turf, disinformation and dog-whistles.
We saw the same thing with Brexit, the same thing when Trump got elected.
I think you just have to read this thread to see how things like “higher crime” and “social issues” have been distorted. Ardern’s decline coincided with a significant rise in disinformation, primarily from US based sources, as observed by the Disinformation Project.
That lead to the protests and the occupation of parliament grounds.
I think you have it about right.
If ‘saving 20,000 lives’ is such a powerful message, why didn’t Labour campaign on that?
Instead, they quietly dropped their final mask mandate, despite Covid still being prevalent. Perhaps if Prime Minister Hipkins hadn’t done that, he wouldn’t have caught Covid in the last weeks of the campaign.
Just look at Mt Albert (the electorate that Jacinda Ardern held, and Labour Prime Minister Helen Clark before her). Check out the majorities that both Prime Ministers held in elections going back decades:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Albert_(New_Zealand_electorate)
What about 2023? Well, the provisional results have Labour ahead by 106 votes. There’s been a similar massive shift in a number of Auckland electorates. It would be naive to think all those voters were beguiled by a proliferation of adverts from the opposition.
Like I said upthread, ‘Jacindamania’ was basically a cult of personality, and once she started dividing the country, the cult was over.
Sorry about the link, by the way. The original was posted on a blog (Trigger warning: site run by ex-leaders of ACT, so clearly right-wing bias) and was in three parts. The lists are far too long to quote in full, and I don’t want to have to defend every point made there - but dismissing it as ‘disinformation’ is exactly what Jacinda Ardern was fond of doing with facts that she didn’t like. Here’s part of the original blog:
https://www.bassettbrashandhide.com/post/alex-holland-labour-s-failures-1
Note that the author’s name is fairly prominent- it’s not written anonymously.
No doubt. It isn’t like moderate to progressives across the world haven’t had to deal with the same thing though. Some however have managed to maintain their support. Some not.
To me it seems simpler to think of her like Winston Churchill, an inspiring leader for a crisis but not the choice of the people when the crisis was past. After the crisis? A different skill set. High inflation? Voters are tempted to just vote for whatever change is.