General 2008 Election

  • Thread starter warriors4life_old
  • Start date

Which party will you vote for in the 2008 Election?

  • ACT

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Alliance

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Destiny Church

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Green

    Votes: 3 20.0%
  • Labour

    Votes: 4 26.7%
  • Maori Party

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • National

    Votes: 8 53.3%
  • New Zealand First

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Progressives

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • United Future

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    15

Jesbass_old

Guest
F**ktard.

Come on, champ, if you're old enough to remember Thatcher's political influences on the British Isles, you're old enough to know how to act better. ;)

I know you're stirring, but not everyone else does.
 

Northern_Union

Guest
Who else on here is old enough to remember the irreversible damage that Reagun and Thatcher caused to western world?

It wouldn't be so bad if it was the rich who had voted national in, but the fact is that it is the working class (who National despise, but need to brainwash to get their votes.)

The nation should be ashamed of itself.

And who remembers the damage done to this country by David Longe and Roger Douglas around the Labour cabinet?
 

Jesbass_old

Guest
It's official - Bill & Ben are the 10th largest political party in New Zealand, after performing better than Libertarianz, and the Legalise Cannabis Party. They got 0.51% meaning they get their money back, unless special votes sabotage them. They got between 10,000 and 11,000 votes. Hilarious!
 

Jesbass_old

Guest
I'd just like to add that although I've not been a fan of Helen Clark, I can't fault how much she gave for this country. Sure, I think that a lot of the time she was pushing in the wrong direction, but there's no doubting her passion for making a New Zealand a better place.

I also thought that she was very gracious in defeat, and I can understand her decision to step down as leader of the Labour party. With Michael Cullen doing the same, it should be interesting to see the fresh new face of Labour leadership.
 

PB_old

Guest
Polar, I think you and are both largely agreeing on the same thing, just in a roundabout way, mate. Unfortunately though I almost pity you for getting intellectual support from skinnyravs LOL

Pretty much the to former, Iafeta. Figuratively, to get the same answer, you're using addition and I'm using subtraction.

No comment to the latter, though. Then again, no comment is a comment, so that's right up there with 'near miss'. A literal 'near miss' means you hit something.

No wonder people mangle English.
 

PB_old

Guest
And who remembers the damage done to this country by David Longe and Roger Douglas around the Labour cabinet?

They made the right moves early on after the Muldoon nearly bankrupted the country but Lange lost control of the rabid elements that wanted to take Rogernomics to the nth degree. Roger Douglas is the only person in new Zealand I'd like to see tried for treason. Umm...maybe Michael Fay and David Richwhite as well.
 

Northern_Union

Guest
Michael Fay and David Richwhite, the gentlemen that stitched the government up over NZ rail? lol I don't know weather to knight them or hang them such was the number they did on the government.
 

daj3_old

Guest
NU, I don't think the liberal approach to crime works as such, it's just proven to work better. I'll dig up some stats and studies if you like, but they're pretty heavy reading...

In many ways we can never know what approach to crime "works"... I'm of the opinion that crime is pretty much a constant, (allowing for increases in population). What fluxuates is the way crime is recorded and reported, and also what behaviour is actually deemed as criminal.

Serious and minor assaults are down since 1994 (per 1000 population), intimidation and threats are up (probably indicative of the communication age and a greater willingness to report threats/intimidation to police). Grievous assault is up marginally, but it plays such a minor role in overall crime stats that a notable increase is a matter of 20-30 more cases.

Since 1998, the number of murders in the country have been... (per year) 53, 50, 56, 53, 66, 46, 47, 61, 49, 45...

The overall crime rate has stayed pretty constant... the one notable jump of reported crime is in the area of violent crime... and as I have earlier stated, there is a steady, noticeable decrease in assaults... but a sharp increase in threats/intimidation which accounts for most of the increase in "violent crime". Everything else is pretty much constant or so insignificantly low that the fear of numbers gradually rising and getting any higher is irrational.

Basically what I'm getting at is that crime has stayed constant despite various efforts to curb it. Even when these efforts are successful (such as the drive to get people to report domestic abuse, resulting in a noticeable increase in cases being reported) politicians and the media skew it so that we hear that "domestic crime is on the rise".

Crime is not on the rise, it will be if we start making it more exciting and "bad" for our young people.
 

daj3_old

Guest
And I think some people on here need to recognise that the environment is not a policy or an issue anymore. The environment is our survival as a species. It needs to be priority one, because otherwise most of our country is going to be underwater.
 

Iafeta_old

Guest
And I think some people on here need to recognise that the environment is not a policy or an issue anymore. The environment is our survival as a species. It needs to be priority one, because otherwise most of our country is going to be underwater.

Agree entirely. It is a massive issue. I daresay though there are far bigger environmental issues than a largely forested, sparsely populated area we call the Coast. The issue as discussed though was neither ecologically based or economically based, it was a piece of bedsharing politics that was faceless and deceitful given the West Coast Accord was being followed and bettered.

Even on the Coast, in my view there are bigger environmental issues, such as the rapidly changing face of Franz Josef and Fox Glaciers. But that doesn't get as many votes as the discussed issue of the day.

I ask you one question - have you been to the Coast? From your time there, what more could the average West Coaster do for the Environment? Those people are green to the core, they are liberal greenies. Yet they were the first ones under the pump.

New Zealand should be proud of it's leadership in green environmentalism. It has a proud history of it, I daresay we all stood up as one and disdainfully scorned the French for the Rainbow Warrior incident. We need to look more at our urban areas for ways to reduce our carbon footprint per capita.
 

daj3_old

Guest
For sure, I agree there... but when you have a choice between having your government influenced by the greens or a government influenced by a party that outright denies that climate change exists, it's pretty scary that NZ picks the latter.

I have to admit to being a little unfamiliar with the West Coast situation... promise I'll read up on it with an open mind... I can't say I've thought much of the Greens in the past... but given the urgency of the situation we find ourselves in I looked into them and found their policy to be mostly sensible.

I'm done with arguing the merits of Labour/national... from here I'm hoping that John can work out some way of keeping ACT out of the government. It'd be nice if he got the Maori Party, Jim Anderton and Peter Dunne... then you've got two of the most intelligent people in Parliament... and a few MPs who aren't afraid to think outside of the box/will actually listen to their constituents. A green influenced National party is probably the best case scenario, unlikely but it'd be best. That way any airy fairy Greens policies will fall by the wayside, and you'll get a moral/liberal perspective in government as opposed to the $$$ influence, which we have enough of in National...
 

Kav_old

Guest
And yes, if 3.6 million people confronted me about the repeal of section 59 I would gladly tell them they are all wrong. Majorities the world over have gotten it wrong. A majority voted in the Nazi party in Germany...

There are certain rights that any civilised society must recognise... the convention on the rights of the child ensures that they must be protected from all forms of physical and mental abuse. That right isn't even provided for in international law for adults! Why would it be right then for the law to be in favour of the parents when it comes to cases of abuse? People don't understand, 4 year olds don't get to vote in this country... f*ck your parental rights! If you need the right to discipline your kid with a horse whip then you don't really deserve kids. If you can give me any good reason why 89% of the country should oppose the repeal then I might reconsider my view... but right now your argument is about as much good to me as "99% of the population believe we should kill all the jews"...

and what about the 18,000+ unborn babies killed in the womb each year? - what say do they get? Violence begets violence.

Kav
 

Kav_old

Guest
Helen Clark you scorcerous bi***, how bitter sweet it is for me today to hear the country came to it's senses and did to you like you did to your parties own West Coast. You got farked. A lot of us from school had to leave the region, a lot have moved overseas, after loving an area we grew up in and we wanted to have a part in leading to a progressive and sustainable future, you farked us over to get into bed with Nandor Tanzig and those slobs from the Green party. There is no more eco-tourism sensitive part of the world, let alone New Zealand, than the West Coast. But you still farked us over for a ecological conservation issue that we had under control. That's right, the little old folk down on the West Coast had managed it successfully themselves and helped set up a nice balance of ecotourism and a thriving private sector economy. And you you scoundrel, a century after Richard Seddon, a Coaster, had set up the forerunners to the movement of leftist socialism and the labour movement worldwide in a little old pub on the West Coast, forget all your roots and crapped on us from an almighty height.

I cannot be more happier to see you out of power. Some say the Coast is backwards, but for the love of God son you don't destroy a man's home particularly when you owe it so much.

I have a certain sympathy with your point of view, Iafeta.

Kav
 

daj3_old

Guest
Make abortion illegal... I'm not actually very opinionated on that issue. It won't change the fact that repealing section 59 is a step in the right direction for NZ.
 

Kav_old

Guest
Make abortion illegal... I'm not actually very opinionated on that issue. It won't change the fact that repealing section 59 is a step in the right direction for NZ.

It might mean we have consistency in how we treat our children, both born and unborn.
It is very hypocritical for Labour and Green MP's to be pro-choice on abortion (great majority anyway) whilst looking to protect children from ill treatement. I also cannot reconcile the Green's "protection of the environment is paramount" with their nil protection attitudes towards the unborn. This smacks of nature ahead of humanity and I have always thought humanity comes first.

Kav
 

Similar threads

2 3
Replies
48
Views
3K
The 22 BEAST_old
  • Poll
14 15 16
Replies
312
Views
12K
JonB_old
Lord Gnome of Howick MBE
Replies
7
Views
941
Miket12
Miket12
Lord Gnome of Howick MBE
  • Locked
  • Poll
55 56 57
Replies
1K
Views
41K
mt.wellington
mt.wellington
Replies
6
Views
2K
Esoj_old