Monday, September 19, 2005
Too stupid to vote?
Can't help but think there are 5000 pretty fucking stupid Labour supporters in Epsom - I know some geeks will argue you should cast your vote for the people who best represent your interests but jesus christ, even Labour's own candidate was saying vote Worth.
Way to go to boost the right- dickheads.
If they had all cast their votes for Worth he would have won by several thousand and Act would be goooooonnnneee.
I wonder if the Sunday Star-Times will retract its Act euology?
But it wasn't only the media/bloggers that wrongly counted Act out and the friendly Newmarket buisness association is offering to help Green MP Keith Locke "run naked through the streets of Epsom".
Haha, dork.
Returning to the SST, yesterday it reported:
He didn't - Labour's Ruth Dyson won with a 1700 majority.
All in all though, I thought the media's coverage of the election, particularly TV, was excellent!
I never understood though, and still don't, how Brash took such a hiding over the Freakish-Brethren pamphlets and got off so lightly about National's alleged, albeit disputed, asking the Americans for help to sway the NZ public against being nuclear-free.
Which issue raised bigger questions about fitness to govern - outsourcing foreign policy or knowing about a ridiculous pamphlet written by a bunch of hypocritical Christian wierdos?
I say hypocritical because: the EB's claim to spurn the outside world yet are happy enough to accept outsiders' money for their businesses, claim to spurn the media yet are close to being the biggest advertisers in rural media in the country, don't vote yet engage in political campaigns....all the public wants is a little consistency.
In other news, the Tigers were simply sensational in their thumping of the Broncos last night which followed from their 50-6 win over another semi-finalist the Cowboys the weekend before.
Way to go to boost the right- dickheads.
If they had all cast their votes for Worth he would have won by several thousand and Act would be goooooonnnneee.
I wonder if the Sunday Star-Times will retract its Act euology?
But it wasn't only the media/bloggers that wrongly counted Act out and the friendly Newmarket buisness association is offering to help Green MP Keith Locke "run naked through the streets of Epsom".
“We don’t want our electorate to be the home of the first broken campaign promise. Hence the local business association is prepared to make it very easy for Mr Locke to deliver his promised goods,” said Cameron Brewer, General Manager of the Newmarket Business Association.
Haha, dork.
Returning to the SST, yesterday it reported:
David Carter's victory in Banks Peninsula is his first time claiming an electorate in a general election. The National list MP was last elected as an MP in August 1994's Selwyn by-election to replace Ruth Richardson.
He didn't - Labour's Ruth Dyson won with a 1700 majority.
All in all though, I thought the media's coverage of the election, particularly TV, was excellent!
I never understood though, and still don't, how Brash took such a hiding over the Freakish-Brethren pamphlets and got off so lightly about National's alleged, albeit disputed, asking the Americans for help to sway the NZ public against being nuclear-free.
Labour has plunged National into another embarrassing controversy over the nuclear issue by ambushing it with a claim that senior MP Lockwood Smith asked United States senators for help from a US think-tank to sway New Zealand opinion. National leader Don Brash acknowledged the seriousness of the issue last night by saying it would have been inappropriate if Dr Smith had sought such assistance. But Dr Brash, who was at the same meeting as Dr Smith in January last year, said he did not know if Dr Smith made the comment. "I'm neither confirming nor denying, said Brash......
Which issue raised bigger questions about fitness to govern - outsourcing foreign policy or knowing about a ridiculous pamphlet written by a bunch of hypocritical Christian wierdos?
I say hypocritical because: the EB's claim to spurn the outside world yet are happy enough to accept outsiders' money for their businesses, claim to spurn the media yet are close to being the biggest advertisers in rural media in the country, don't vote yet engage in political campaigns....all the public wants is a little consistency.
In other news, the Tigers were simply sensational in their thumping of the Broncos last night which followed from their 50-6 win over another semi-finalist the Cowboys the weekend before.
Comments:
I thought the TV coverage on one was a bit shonky with one of the panel saying the lead was too big for labour to overcome after about 10% had come in. He repeated that comment a few more times over the next hour or two despite the margin decreasing noticeably each 20 or so minutes.
And it took until the margin was only about 2% for them to even mention the possibility that Labour might hit the 'front' as it were.
If they had been better prepared and had people crunching the numbers (something you would expect from the nations most watched channel) they might have predicted such a final result quite early on.
10% counted and the margin is 9
20% counted and the margin is 7
etc
etc
but no, it took until they were very close for anybody to start discussing it. That seemed to me to be a major blunder on their part. The rest of the coverage and commentators were very good though. A nice range of people and opinions.
And I don't like Susan Wood at all so I had to put up with her a lot.
It sure was a bitch though watching TV 3, TV One, the league semi, and pirates of the carribean all at the same time!
And it took until the margin was only about 2% for them to even mention the possibility that Labour might hit the 'front' as it were.
If they had been better prepared and had people crunching the numbers (something you would expect from the nations most watched channel) they might have predicted such a final result quite early on.
10% counted and the margin is 9
20% counted and the margin is 7
etc
etc
but no, it took until they were very close for anybody to start discussing it. That seemed to me to be a major blunder on their part. The rest of the coverage and commentators were very good though. A nice range of people and opinions.
And I don't like Susan Wood at all so I had to put up with her a lot.
It sure was a bitch though watching TV 3, TV One, the league semi, and pirates of the carribean all at the same time!
Yamis / Nzer,
you should have watched TV3 all the way through; they were onto the fact that Nat goes to an early lead very early on. Particularly Laws of all poeple who continues to grow as a media commentator. He was also the 1st to highlight the country / urban split.
As for the Locke streaking thing Benny; get over it; it's a bit of harmless fun. Good on Locke for going through with it too.
you should have watched TV3 all the way through; they were onto the fact that Nat goes to an early lead very early on. Particularly Laws of all poeple who continues to grow as a media commentator. He was also the 1st to highlight the country / urban split.
As for the Locke streaking thing Benny; get over it; it's a bit of harmless fun. Good on Locke for going through with it too.
# posted by 
: 19 September 2005 at 17:13
: 19 September 2005 at 17:13
I don't think bennyasena has much to get over looking at what little he wrote on that matter...anyway...
Yeah I probably should have watched more of TV 3 but I must say aesthetically TV 3 is always shit. And their panel was small. And I hate Laws.
And the main reason I didn't watch so much of them was that the total vote counted was 15 or so percent behind TV ONE all night.
right, I have to go grocery shopping or my wife will have my balls on a plate.
Yeah I probably should have watched more of TV 3 but I must say aesthetically TV 3 is always shit. And their panel was small. And I hate Laws.
And the main reason I didn't watch so much of them was that the total vote counted was 15 or so percent behind TV ONE all night.
right, I have to go grocery shopping or my wife will have my balls on a plate.
I too have been no fan of Laws in the past; but put aside his annoying personality, and he's one of the most astute around.
He certainly pissed all over the "professionals" on TVNZ
He certainly pissed all over the "professionals" on TVNZ
# posted by : 20 September 2005 at 09:04
: 20 September 2005 at 09:04
You may be right Nzer.
Bloody words eh? Always getting people in trouble...
Talking about dorks, where's the opinion piece on Peter Dunne's stellar performance on Saturday night?
Bloody words eh? Always getting people in trouble...
Talking about dorks, where's the opinion piece on Peter Dunne's stellar performance on Saturday night?
# posted by : 20 September 2005 at 15:29
: 20 September 2005 at 15:29
I think Russell Brown gives a decent summary. I missed his arrival 'live' as I was channel surfing but when I caught the 'replay' it seemed as though he had just been told that his mother was really his father.
RB: "On the other hand, I'm struggling to recall a worse election-night performance than that of Peter Dunne - you'd have to go back to Mike Moore's infamous "long, cold night" speech in 1993, but even that was just an unfortunate ramble, rather than the strutting, pompous effort that Dunne put on. "The people have spoken!" he declared, neglecting to mention that "the people" had removed five of his eight MPs. His tirade against TV One's election night anchor Mark Sainsbury - preceded, apparently, by an abusive email to TV3's John Campbell - was simply embarrassing.
Amusingly, his extraordinarily presumptuous ultimatum about refusing to support a government where "the Greens sit around the Cabinet table" appeared to have evaporated by close of play yesterday. The realities of coalition politics may yet mean that Rod Donald doesn't get his Cabinet post, but by any measure the Greens have come out of Election 2005 with more credibility than Dunne and his silly party."
RB: "On the other hand, I'm struggling to recall a worse election-night performance than that of Peter Dunne - you'd have to go back to Mike Moore's infamous "long, cold night" speech in 1993, but even that was just an unfortunate ramble, rather than the strutting, pompous effort that Dunne put on. "The people have spoken!" he declared, neglecting to mention that "the people" had removed five of his eight MPs. His tirade against TV One's election night anchor Mark Sainsbury - preceded, apparently, by an abusive email to TV3's John Campbell - was simply embarrassing.
Amusingly, his extraordinarily presumptuous ultimatum about refusing to support a government where "the Greens sit around the Cabinet table" appeared to have evaporated by close of play yesterday. The realities of coalition politics may yet mean that Rod Donald doesn't get his Cabinet post, but by any measure the Greens have come out of Election 2005 with more credibility than Dunne and his silly party."
At least Moore's "dark and stormy night" speech had humour value.
# posted by : 20 September 2005 at 17:37
: 20 September 2005 at 17:37
Post a Comment