Brash concedes
October 1st, 2005 at 12:45 pm by David FarrarHeh back on the 20th I blogged in my “What I would do if I was …” post that Don should “concede the election within an hour or so of the final count”.
Don conceded around an hour after the 11 am results 
Now we just need Don to confirm that he will stay on for the next election. There is absolutely no mood for change (well not from Earls Court, London anyway and while I think it is silly to predict the Government will collapse after a year etc, it is going to have a very difficult job passing laws, and is already stained by corruption allegations.
The challenge for National is not just to win the next election, but to demolish Labour so that they take several terms to recover.
UPDATE: Don has confirmed he is staying on. Excellent.
No tag for this post.
October 1st, 2005 at 1:13 pm
Um, let’s see – Don Brash has never managed to win an election in his life, and you think he still has what it takes to lead the Nats?
Mr Magoo will have to go if the Nats ever want to get back in – and given the Tory tradition of knifing the loser I expect his caucus will move to dump him soon.He also destroyed ACT, their only likely coalition partner, and United Future are down the dunny – great strategy there.
Labour’s vote has barely moved over the last three elections – which seems to suggest they are doing something right somewhere.
It’s tempting to quote Dr Cullen’s memorable words “We won, you lost, eat that!” but that would be stooping too low.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 1:39 pm
Oh dear resorting to name calling. Miss out doing that as a six year old did we.
Well I’m sure Mikey that you are an expert on knowing what National MPs are doing.
Yes Labour won the election. However a 17% increase in the vote is not something to get too upset about.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 1:50 pm
Now now, do I detect a touch of bitterness there David? I suppose supporting the losing team three elections in a row does that to you. Brash is a loser, he couldn’t win an electorate seat in the 80s and he couldn’t take the party to victory in this era.His time is over.
If the Nats couldn’t win this election, when are they going to win one?
And by the way, I have known a number of National MPs over the years.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 1:56 pm
No Mikey I just can’t stand morons. If you knew anyone at all who knows me, you would know I don’t do bitter.
You need to stop parroting spin lines and try actually talking about issues if you want to be taken seriously. When every press gallery reporter has said Brash is safe as houses, then you looke pathethic suggesting he is not.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 2:02 pm
One gets a little tired of the “Brash must go” nonsense – coming from some qwuarters. Mainly it would appear, from some within the wounded ranks of ACT. Cant Richard Prebble do us all a favour – and spend the rest of his life fly fishing up a river somewhere with Bob Jones. Some of us would be more than happy to buy Richard the fly fishing gear !
This will give the remnants of ACT the opportunity to think about whether they intend to remain irrelevent by talking to themselves or become relevent by developing policies and making a real effort to discuss these with the wider community.
Actually Don Brash surprised most people, in just how well he did in the campaign. And the National Party marketing was simply outstanding.
The National Party now has a terrific platform to move forward on – if it has the desire to do so.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 2:03 pm
Brash is a loser alright. I have to agree with most of Mickey Bill’s posts. And how long will it be before Brash is in for a traditional tory knifing? Not long I think!
Vote:I bet John Key is smiling. Well John The old boy will be out to pasture by Xmas.
October 1st, 2005 at 2:16 pm
Well even Brash new he was the Tory Bunny.
Any ideas when he will be gone?
From Brash’s book
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 2:17 pm
Don Brash is one of the best leaders National has had.
Typical Labour supports (who seem very bitter about Labour losing its major advantage) trying to divert the real issues of Labour attempting to deliver all of its “from cradle to the grave and every other aspect of life” policies while interest rates will increase. If only Labour could create competition, tax cuts and friendly business policies instead of being overly union friendly and discouraging high productivity for unsustainable appeasements to the lazy, dunces who join unions. Lets not forget Labour have managed to erode New Zealander values by creating welfare dependency.
National and ACT will form the majority next election.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 2:35 pm
Brash has to go because otherwise he’d be campaigning for election aged 68. However competent he may be, he is old, and he looks, sounds and behaves it. NZers respect and value seniors, but we’re not so big on assuming they’re totally competent and “all there”.
Throughout the campaign I heard people in their 20s, 30s and 40s talking about Brash’s gaffes and forgetfulness kindly. The conversation would almost always include the phrase “he reminds me of my grandfather” and would quickly turn into people sharing anecdotes of the amusing mishaps of their grandparents.
I think he was barely electable this time around, but in three years he won’t be. Not only will he be older, but we’ll have three years of Labour’s spin machine gently pointing out every falter, every forget, every moment of bafflement, every confused look and every senior moment.
Whether that is fair or not, whether he will be capable or not, he will be 68 and he’ll look and sound it – conversations will quickly turn to how we had to take Granny’s car keys off her after she totalled the letterbox for the third time.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 2:41 pm
Hugh P, Act has developed some excellent policies and national has talked about them in the community.
Cadmus and the other fellow, you’d do better to worry about how you’re going to explain the Matai Mafioso’s Labour fund raising schemes in Mangere. Roll on question time. Oh and aren’t you so pleased that Hide is there?
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 3:31 pm
Hide will keep Labour on its toes.
As long as Brash remains competent, he should stay. I have a feeling Helen’s leadership might be challenged by Cullen though.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 4:05 pm
Oh well, you can’t win them all! Happy Labour won, but they won’t win next election so all Don has to do is not embarss himself or his caucus and he’s in next election. So thats 3 years to save for my new life in another country? Excellent.
Justin
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 4:18 pm
I’m a Labour supporter, and I’d like to thank all you right-wing types in blog-land for the great assistance you gave Labour in achieving this victory. Don’t blame the media, the all-embracing grasp of political correctness, or even the fact that parliamentary democracy allows poor people to vote – it is you that have so profoundly contributed to three more years of Helen Clark and Labour in government.
Vote:Such was your general incompetence and inability to make a statement more intelligent than ‘no-kids lesbo’, that I sometimes wonder whether you are all actually members of the Labour Party. No surprises that the public voted in favour of stability, prosperity and experience, and against such petty-minded vindictiveness.
See you in three years’ time! Judging by the reactions of Farrar et al., you have learnt absolutely nothing.
Feel free to prove me right by responding. But don’t call me a ‘moron’, David – it is deeply hurtful.
October 1st, 2005 at 4:19 pm
I’m a Labour supporter, and I’d like to thank all you right-wing types in blog-land for the great assistance you gave Labour in achieving this victory. Don’t blame the media, the all-embracing grasp of political correctness, or even the fact that parliamentary democracy allows poor people to vote – it is you that have so profoundly contributed to three more years of Helen Clark and Labour in government.
Vote:Such was your general incompetence and inability to make a statement more intelligent than ‘no-kids lesbo’, that I sometimes wonder whether you are all actually members of the Labour Party. No surprises that the public voted in favour of stability, prosperity and experience, and against such petty-minded vindictiveness.
See you in three years’ time! Judging by the reactions of Farrar et al., you have learnt absolutely nothing.
Feel free to prove me right by responding. But don’t call me a ‘moron’, David – it is deeply hurtful.
October 1st, 2005 at 4:40 pm
shhhhh SDR, don’t let them know that they are the secret weapon
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 4:44 pm
WOW!! He conceded within the hour just like you said he should. Either you are Nostradamus reincarnated or Don reads your blog. Either way you are amazing David. Just Amazing. I love you.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 4:48 pm
Don hasnt achieved anything, Bolger won 47.8% against a two term labour govt in 1990, Don got 39.1%. Yes the natural rebound has lifted National but Don is the weakest performing party leader in the house in 50 years. All the new MPs will see for themselves day after day his absence, his inability to get the details right when the cameras are running. Far more ambitious people are waiting in the wings and since Don only just beat Bill English, who has got better in this election. Jon Key seems to be the media darling and is younger and would rather be leader when the next election rolls around rather than wait till after when Don is 70 ( in 5 years). Nothing will happen this year , but next years budget will have the NP fretting if the economy rolls on.
Vote:Notice not a peep about Marian Hobbs increasing her majority , what went wrong ? . National had a great candidate, a hard working and experienced campaign manager, yet all for nothing !
October 1st, 2005 at 5:07 pm
good on him – hes a good sport and hope he makes it to pm someday
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 5:09 pm
Peter’s absolutely right. You are truly a political genius, David – just like you always say you are. In fact, after the great job you did in Wellington Central, why don’t you become leader of the National Party? Such is your political skill that I’m sure it would only take a week or so.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 5:17 pm
david, i commend you on a cunning strategy.
Vote:brash will crash in 08, leaving you and blumsky poised to take power in 11.
October 1st, 2005 at 5:18 pm
david, i commend you on a cunning strategy.
Vote:brash will crash in 08, leaving you and blumsky poised to take power in 11.
October 1st, 2005 at 5:33 pm
In this game all that matters is who wins – and the Nats under Don didn’t. And Mr Farrar’s candidate didn’t in Wgtn Central either.Great campaign management there.
For purely selfish reasons, I hope Don stays on as leader for the next 2 or 3 elections.Or maybe even more – that’d be a good strategy
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 5:39 pm
I think they should “appoint” Don as Great Leader indefinitely. Mr Burns almost won political office when he was much older than Don.
And remember, Don actually won this time, it was just MMP and the “no kids lesbo” media that are pretending he didn’t.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 5:53 pm
Wow! Why are the leftys so feral today? Did Labour actually win 10 more seats than National rather than the 2 being reported?
And to those who only wish to come to David’s blog to make dumb comments and to generally gloat – why don’t you just f**k off! Unfortunately, with 3 more years of this Labour government, too many tax-contributing kiwis will be doing just that – out of NZ.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 6:19 pm
The pinkos, being the cowardly types they are, probably thought if they flamed while David was on holiday, they might get away with it.
Anyway, once again, Labour supports voters haven’t surprised me with their selfishness and pure ignorance of the economy. They should make financial literacy compulsory at high school so we can at least teach some future Labour supports how selfish and costly labour’s policies are.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 6:23 pm
seriously gary,
the right-wing echo chamber was so convinced it was going to win
i would like to challenge all you right-wingers who said you would leave the country if labour got elected to do so. i’ll shout you cabs to the airport from my welfare handout.
and next time there will be tighter campaign finance rules, and the left will be better prepared for your shameless republican politics.
we won, you lost, eat that.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 7:04 pm
“When the cat’s away give Dave the raz”
This should be like a stock forum, interest must be disclosed. In what capacity exactly, are you lefties sucking on the public tit?
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 7:34 pm
Ignorance is your speciality Jeremy, we have had the best economy in a generation, and its not the rollercoaster of the Bolger- Shipley years. Plus even with only a minority Labour coalition in the last 6 years its been stable – no Winstone Peters, no Alamein Kopu’s. The ONLY big scandal in the last 3 years was an MP from your side , Dear Sweet Donna Awatere, doing time for Patsy Cline.
Check ou the Reserve Banks graphs of the economy since 1990
http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/keygraphs/
Every indicator has been BETTER under Labour :
Unemployment lowest in 20 years – and consistent !
GDP in the range of 2-5% pa instead of -2 to 7% and we are consistently ahead of Australia for a change
Mortgage rates consistent around 8% and lower than most of the 90′s
90 day rates much less votalile and at a lower rate than the nineties, reflecting the mortgage rates
Household debt is higher but the government now runs surpluses since consumers and busineses have easier access to credit and make better choices than a government.
Vote:This has been the real achievment of labour , consistent economic growth is led by the government getting out of the borrowing game ( and staying out). And the voters have agreed , and in another 3 years time they will agree again
October 1st, 2005 at 8:09 pm
Gary you and your tory arsewipes were happy to claim the 1981 election for national over 14 votes in the Taupo electorate,so eat shit here toe rag and die.My wife and I have come back too Godzone this year and will be employing 10 more kiwi’s in an economic backwater up in the far north by end of october,paying above award/minimum wages and upskilling people.We are only 1 couple of many we know who have done this so you are blowing out your arse.Do not beleive me ask around the Mangamuka Bridge area?.I have already offered on this forum to pay a 1 way ticket fare iffen you wantto go to Oz .Fuck off ya wingger!!!!!.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 8:12 pm
Good God such a pitiful display of flaming I have not seen since oh last week.
I love their bravery hiding away under their aliases. Not even worth yawning about.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 9:05 pm
Skyray:
Vote:First notice that until 1994, before Richardson left, there was a lot of growth, low inflation (thank you Don Brash), competition was created and government debt was greatly reduced. I acknowledge, however, that things turned to custard when Winston was at the reigns of the country
October 1st, 2005 at 9:08 pm
DPF:
If you have any spare time in London, visit Heyward Hill at 10 Curzon Street. Legendary bookstore you might have some fun in.
Vote:October 1st, 2005 at 11:19 pm
BTW, the hysterical balls I’ve been reading above reminds me of a wonderful line from Eric Hoffer’s ‘The True Believer’: “There have been many successful movements without a god, but none without a devil.”
On a partisan level, I say get your sneer on boys and girls because your spectaular (and totally unjustified) political and intellectual arrogance is hilarious. And alienating. But it scares the crap out of me that people like you think you’ve got some divine right to rule. Your stupidity is not only divisive and obnoxious, but ultimately dangerous.
Vote:October 2nd, 2005 at 12:27 am
Craig: have you not noticed the remarkable number of arrogant fools lurking around on your side of politics sneering and posturing and tragically blogging here?
I’ll not defend the sneers, but you don’t half sound a little precious!
Vote:October 2nd, 2005 at 8:04 am
Paul W:
*sigh* I’ve been quite happy to criticise “my side” (as you put it), when I feel criticism is due. I don’t blame David for getting snippy, because I’m getting equally sick of being set up as some kind of straw man.
Vote:October 2nd, 2005 at 8:19 am
Oh dear, Craig ‘Reigning’ Ranapia, so gracious in defeat. Politics is about winning, so you go ahead and call Dons 39% a ‘marvelous achievement’, and snigger at labours ‘problems’ with getting a majority. It so so sad to see those not invited to the birthday party, but still they watch through the window,standing in their own schadenfruede, desperately hoping there isn’t enough cake to go around.
Vote:Don
October 2nd, 2005 at 9:04 am
Skyray:
*zzzzzzz…* Of course, as soon as any negative economic figures come down the pipe – and they will – I’ll enjoy watching you blame everyone else except Michael Cullen. That’s what I ultimately find so disturbing about hyper-partisans of any stripe, it’s so ugly watching them play out their dysfunctional relationships with reality, truth and logic.
Vote:October 2nd, 2005 at 11:48 am
Oh please – a few sarcastic and jubilant comments about winning an election does NOT count as flaming in the blogosphere. This is not granny’s knitting site, it’s mainly about politics which has a tendency to a bit of argy-bargy.
If Mr Magoo had been able to gather a majority, I imagine a lot of the regular contributors here would be crowing and saying extremely unpleasant things about Labour supporters.
I feel your pain, but politics is unforgiving.Don wasn’t up to it. As I’ve already noted he has lost three elections now, whatever his other skills.
As a non-Nat, I will be worried when they drop him and go with John Keys and Katherine Rich – that will be a very hard team to beat.
Vote:October 2nd, 2005 at 12:20 pm
“If Ruth Richardson was so great why was she dumped as Finance Minister at the end of 1993, was it because the net growth over 3 years was ZERO.
In those 3 years mortgage rates were between 14.5 and 8.5% and rising back up for the rest of the nineties, and unemployment in the 90 -93 period going from 7.5% to 11.5%.
Look hard at the Reserve Banks graphs for the last 15 years and remember which part was national and which was labour.” -Skyray
Yeah average growth was near zero, however, that’s why she was dumped as finance minister because fools like you cared about the “now” results and didn’t care at all about the positive long term effects of reforms. National was concerned it wouldn
Vote:October 2nd, 2005 at 3:06 pm
“I think Richardson and Douglas did a great job, now all we need is for it to be finished.”
Vote:Been a long time waiting for the second coming : )
“it was the implementation of the Reserve Banks
October 2nd, 2005 at 6:11 pm
Brash too old? Winston Churchill was in his eighties when he retired from being PM and look at how he’s remembered.
Vote:October 2nd, 2005 at 6:25 pm
Amongst other things he is remembered for being kicked out of office just after the WW2
Vote:October 2nd, 2005 at 7:08 pm
“Brash then became a war correspondent in the second Anglo-Boer war between Britain and self-proclaimed Afrikaners in South Africa. He was captured in a Boer ambush of a British Army train convoy and thrown into prison.
Vote:However, he made a daring escape which made him something of a national hero. One night he scaled the prison walls and slipped by the sentries. Then, travelling on freight trains, he crossed over 500 kilometres of enemy territory and crossed the South African border to Louren
October 3rd, 2005 at 11:35 am
If the Nats want to keep Brash as their leader, they should. As for the rest of us, we’ve got better things to get on with, like clebrating the defeat of the Right again.
Vote:October 3rd, 2005 at 2:28 pm
“Every indicator has been BETTER under Labour”
How are brothels next to schools and suburban homes a good indicator?
How are record numbers of underage girls, many still children no more than 10-12, selling their bodies to pedophiles on our streets a good indicator?
How is the increasingly extreme and unbalanced trade deficit a good indicator?
How is the demolition of our contitutional arrangements and traditions (Labours dumping of the Privy Council in favour a politically stacked Supreme Court) without even a pretense of a referendum a good indicator?
How is having a leader so profoundly stupid and ignorant that she thinks she not the Queen is “soveriegn” in New Zealand a good indicator?
How is the illegal campaigning by unions a good indicator?
How is the physical violence and bullying by Labourite cult members during the election a good indicator?
How are record levels of Aids and STDS, one of the highest rates in the Western world, a good indicator?
How is the fact that after six years in government the ability to own a family home is futher away for most Kiwis than ever before a good indicator?
How is the fact that Labour spits on the US at every opportunity but cosies up to anti-Western terrorist nations like Iran a good indicator?
Vote:October 3rd, 2005 at 5:23 pm
Gee Shawn, I wonder how much of this is true and/or verifiable. Odd little world you live in!
Everyone’s entitled to an opinion, but you do tend to dress yours up as if it were a scared dissertation rather than a bit of a rave.
Aside from the privy council comment, most of this is bollocks (and I happen to think that ditching the privy council makes sense not least of all because of the tendency of the law lords to refer matters back to NZ). The Trade deficit problem, and it is one albeit cyclically, would have been made much worse had National’s tax cuts been implemented. Are you at all economically literate?
Oh and the Queen comment, I doubt Helen’s at all confused about who is soveriegn or what we might do about it… gosh, wouldn’t it be terrible if we had a head of state who grew up in NZ, lived here, and gave a damn?
Vote:October 3rd, 2005 at 6:35 pm
Perhaps Shawn is unaware that prostitution has been technically legal in NZ for a long time. It is only solicitation that was against the law. Which of course disadvantaged only the prostitutes. As a schoolchild under Muldoon I caught the bus past brothels on K-Road every day, which has incidentally ALWAYS been right next to Auckland Girls Grammar.
Underage girls do often end up prostitutes, that is true. It is no more true now than it ever was. Children seeking this kind of work is typically a consequence of child poverty, which has decreased under Labour. I can’t believe your statistics, perhaps you’re basing that all on late night cruises around the typical streetwalking areas?
Yeah, well that’s an unfortunate consequence of regulating prostitution – underage kids can’t work in brothels anymore so if they’re going to do it it’s going to be on the street. Notice how they do it anyway, despite it being against the law?
Perhaps the answer isn’t banging them in jail, but sorting out their family lives? Giving a shit about them instead of cutting all benefits to benefit your back pocket?
But why am I wasting my time on this? Moral mouthoffs like Shawn will never change their tune until they are caught redhanded doing exactly what they sermonize against.
Vote:October 4th, 2005 at 7:10 pm
Anyone who thinks Labour can pull off a 4th term is being unrealistic. They won’t. Governments come and go in cycles. Even those that perform well are tossed out… either from economic conditions (they take credit for creating it all, so it makes sense they should take the blame when it falls apart) or the public just wanting a change. By 2008 both of those are likely to be in place. This isn’t political bias… it’s the unfortunate game of politics. They’ll scream at you about the horrors of the opposition, but in reality, things really don’t change that much… Governments affect things less than they think they do, in their own little worlds. Jim Anderton has not “created jobs” like he says he has. The only thing you can do is screw up less than other people. Labour has done it reasonably well, they haven’t meddled too much, and the economic upward cycle was not hindered. But to suggest that they are largely responsible for it is putting too much faith in them. A faith that will backfire in the inevitable slowdown that will make it “the Government’s fault”. This next term will have more than one Prime Minister, almost certainly. Maybe even like the last Labour Govt that had 3 of them in one term. Looking historically, the last term of any Government typically has more than the one PM. It may often be because of political turmoil, but it’s also a smart way to position yourself when the defeat comes along. Helen Clark trying for PM in 2008 would put the Labour Party in a poor position to try to retain as many seats as possible and to try to wrestle back power as soon as they can. A losing Party needs to change a fair bit to win again, so a restructure that begins while still in power gives enough time to win it back again, say, 6 years, rather than 9 years, later.
Vote:October 5th, 2005 at 12:11 am
You crystal ball gazers talk with great conviction about something very unpredictable. I find it all about as believable as predictions of the impending house market crash. That is to say, I’m certain the market will crash, but don’t believe anyone really knows when or why. And if they get it right, it could just be blind luck.
It would be statistically unlikely for Labour to get another term, as a 3 term Labour has not happened often. Apart from that, all other analysis is pure guesswork. No one really knows what coalition will result, what moves will be made during the coming term, or what international events will weigh in on the process. And since our electoral system recently changed, most statistics are spurious anyway.
A minority government might actually satisfy a lot of NZers. It’s likely to be less bossy, less radical, less decisive and to move slower. Which could be just what NZ asked for and needs.
Vote: