Some crazy shit has gone down recently in politics so here is some of it in no particular order:
POLLS SAY LABOUR IS FUCKED!
Three recent polls have put Labour way behind National. The media has reported this as news. Sorry, but it is not. Labour has been behind in the polls for a while. This is not news. What is news is that Clark thinks polls are a lot of shit. Which could be seen by some people as denial of an imminent loss in an election. Others realise that Helen might be smarter than that and realise that polls are answered primarily by people who can a) afford landlines or do not have a landline because they have a mobile, b) are at home between 6 and 9 pm midweek, and c) who deign to give up 5 minutes of their time to answer the questions of the pollster.
Moral of the story: Media outlets shouldn’t portray the results of biased polls as actual results: “That followed Saturday’s Fairfax Media poll by AC Nielsen showing National winning 54 percent of the party vote against Labour’s 30 per cent.” (from a stuff.co.nz story) No sorry, they didn’t win 54% of the party vote. What really happened is that 54% of people asked in the poll who can afford landlines or do not rely on their mobile, who are at home between 6 and 9 pm midweek, and who deign to give up 5 minutes of their time to answer the questions of the pollster said they would vote National a few months out from an election. Which is a totally different prospect. Polls should be banned from the hands of evil media outlets controlled by reptilian shapeshifters like Tim Pankhurst, who use them as news.
WINSTON HATED BY OTHER POLITICIANS. NO SHIT!
Matthew Hooton, some dude who worked for National back in the day and is now a political commentator (one wonders how people who have been highly involved in the day to day partisanship of political parties can be taken seriously as authorities in the media about politics) came out today and said that there was collusion between those evil mean communist parties, that we know as National and Labour, to quash our democratic freedoms, by eliminating Winston Peters in Tauranga.
Hooton says: “For Labour to make it easier for him [Winnie] to win Tauranga would be a dreadful mistake for them in terms of the potential to put forward a Government.”
Sorry Mr. Hooton, but people in Tauranga should vote for who they want as their electorate MP. That is how representative democracy works. Just because you dislike Winnie and see him as a destructive force in NZ politics, does not mean that all people see him this way. He has provided humour, good looks, and hard work for the people of Tauranga for what seems like forever. If people want to vote for him they should, just as they should vote for the Labour or the National candidate if they feel they would do a better job.
This shows most people – even the people involved in politics – are ignorant of how MMP works. Even though the polls (the reliability of which I talked about above) show that National could win more that 50% of the vote, they shouldn’t count on this. One sure way of alienating one of the most torrentially polemic forces in NZ politics is to put him on the outside of NZ politics. Should he win Tauranga or if NZ First captures 5% of the party vote (which I hate to believe is still possible, but it probably will happen) Winston will have a renewed sense of self importance and will wreak havoc on both parties. Lets face it, 2005 – 2008 he has been a force of stability for the Labour govt, he’s not that bad (except the racist stuff.) Also if National gets just under 50% and needs a few seats to patch together an agreement, where will they get them from? It is unlikely that the Greens or Maori party (the two biggest minor parties) will work with the Nats, so they will have to rely on Hide, Dunne and maybe… Peters.
Moral of the story: Radio New Zealand should replace Hooton with ME and Labour and National should do their own thing in Tauranga and not join forces in an axis of evil to plot the demise of Winston.
JOHN KEY FLAUNTS OPULENCE
John Key, leader of the National Party gave $30,000 to the National Party. Think of what $30,000 could buy… mmmm that’s like 8570 bottles of V or a tertiary education.
Creepily $30,000 is also a book by Robert Schutz who says there are two types of income: earned(you know like the dollars you get for working your ass off for Telecom for two years at minimum wage) and unearned(they type which Mr. Key derives most of his income from and how he can afford to buy houses in Hawaii.) Schutz calculated that $30,000 was the amount that people needed as a guaranteed annual income (in 1990) to solve not only social ills, but inflation, and the growing gap between rich and poor in America.
Maybe this is some ironically malicious tribute to the ideas that he hopes to destroy (lol).
STUPID PEOPLE REALLY REALY REALLY WANT TO BE ABLE TO FUCK UP THEIR KIDS!
The Kiwi Party (whose leader Larry Baldock is incidentally going to run for the Tauranga electorate) says: “They will not drown out the voice of the people!” By “voice” I guess he means signatures, and by “the people” he probably actually means the small percentage of NZ who want to be able to use the defence of discipline when they beat their children.
In a press release today Baldock claimed that they had collected 400,000 signatures. Most of which are mine, using a fake name, a fake signature and using my left hand to sign. Hardy har har.
Instead of actually talking about the substance of the child discipline legislation, and making coherent points, Mr. Baldock plays on peoples ignorance of what they perceive the act to mean.
As Bradford said: “There’s still no evidence that I can see of parents being arrested and dragged through the courts for unnecessary reasons or of children being forcibly removed from their parents because they smack, which was all the sort of stuff our opponents put up while the bill was in front of Parliament.”
Lets face it the anti-smacking act probably won’t change when it comes up for review in a little while and the anti anti-smacking act petition is a badly worded experiment in the uselessness of non-binding referenda initiated by 10% of the population.