Connell suspended
September 26th, 2006 at 12:18 pm by David FarrarThe National Party caucus has decided to suspend Brian Connell.
Leader Don Brash says the suspension is the result of Mr Connell’s behaviour stretching back over the past few years.
The party board decided last week that Mr Connell had again failed to show the restraint and discipline expected of a caucus member and decided it no longer had any confidence in the Rakaia MP.
Tags: National
September 26th, 2006 at 12:39 pm
Excellent. Not before time. Hopefully he will simply resign gracefully.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:41 pm
Good! Brian Connell is a nob. Brash should send him home to his mother and get her to teach him some ‘collective responsibility’!
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:42 pm
it is about time. His behaviour over the years leaves alot to be desired. Good riddance.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:43 pm
it is about time. His behaviour over the years leaves alot to be desired. Good riddance.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:45 pm
Good riddance. There is plenty of more talented individuals waiting on the list who deserve to be in Parliment before this idiot.
Maybe he might go to Labour and replace Taito?
At least one party has the balls to sort out troublesome MP’s not just do the Clark and slap them with a wet bus ticket.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:46 pm
I expect he will be challenged for the nomination, though he appears to have local support for now. It is what the Labour Party should have done with Philip Field.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:47 pm
Where are all the bold chaps who last night were predicting a leadership change?
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:50 pm
Excellent, swift decisive move.
Shows precisely how a party should deal with errant MPs who can’t exercise proper discipline.
Big contrast between National’s decisive action, and Labour wanting to drag out the Phillip Field affair for as long as possible, and spin things ad infinitum so they don’t have to face reality.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:51 pm
Oh happy day (oh happy day)
Vote:Oh happy day (oh happy day)
When Don sacked (when Don sacked)
When Don sacked (when Don sacked)
Don sacked (when Don sacked)
Now lets keep that cunt away (oh happy day)
Oh happy day (oh happy day)
September 26th, 2006 at 12:53 pm
IP – I’m sure the PM would like to be rid of Field, but they have a slim majority. If National was in government with a wafer-thin majority the action against Connell would not have been nearly as swift or decisive.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:55 pm
Idiots.
They could have had a $500,000 9 month long inquiry find that he was just perfect for national, and the crowds would cheer and sing praise for Dear Leader.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:57 pm
good
leadership is about leading
Helen Klarke needs learn this
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 12:58 pm
Payback for Brash. And most likely richly deserved.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:01 pm
Except, Graeme, Labour’s only chance of being even slightly competitive at the next election is by taking bold, decisive action. Labour needs to take bold, decisive action to rescue the economy from recession. Labour needs to take bold, decisive action and repay the money it misappropriated for the last election. Labour needs to take bold, decisive action as National has with its errant MP.
If the consequence of that bold, decisive action is that Labour becomes a minority government with more reliance on the Greens, so be it. Labour’s credibility is at stake.
I actually believe Winston will pull the pin before the election anyway. If he wants to stay in Parliament another term–or more importantly, if the rest of New Zealand First does, he needs to do something dramatic. NZFirst is not a sustainable brand as long as it remains Labour’s lap-dog. Labour is looking at minority government at best within twelve months anyway. It might as well do it cleanly, get rid of Field now, and re-broker a stronger relationship with the Greens and the Maori Party, rather than be seen to be carrying dodgy MPs just for the sake of retaining power.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:04 pm
Surprise!
Can I ask (quite genuinely) what does the suspension mean for Connell? Presumably he is still the MP for rakaia until the next election.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:06 pm
southern raider says, :Maybe he might go to Labour and replace Taito?”
How about he replaces Clark. That might help to make the Labour Party less currupt.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:09 pm
The thing now is to shut him up until they can finally get shot of him. I’ve got a roll of duct tape in the back of my ute ?
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:09 pm
Llew:
For the moment, as I understand it, Connell remains a member of the National Party. He remains the National MP for Rakaia. He simply isn’t permitted to attend National’s caucus until his status is resolved. National’s board may at some stage expel him from the National Party, but that doesn’t affect his status as the Rakaia MP.
Fairly obvious that he won’t be reselected as National’s next candidate for whenever the election takes place.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:10 pm
llew,
If he doesn’t resign from Parliament (which I would assume the Nats want him to do) then yes he will stay on as an MP.
He is currently suspended from caucus, effectively meaning he won’t be showing up to the House until either
i) he gets the boot from National
ii) he resigns from National and becomes an independent MP
iii) he quits parliament.
I’m hoping it will be the latter, at least that way (although we will have to put up with a byelection in a seat National hold a large majority) Rakaia will get a half-decent MP representing them.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:10 pm
“. Labour needs to take bold, decisive action to rescue the economy from recession”
We are in a recession? well fancy that.
Lets see in they follow through and boot him, a suspension means very little.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:11 pm
Given the Augean Stables that is the current Parliament what a pity the good citizerns cant do the same to the rest of the miscreants.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:15 pm
Having an MP on a loose edge damages National’s chances of forming a government before 2008, should Clark ski off a cliff at Treble Cone and splatter herself onto the rocks below, or even if, as many hope, the recent polls mean that she is in for early retirement as PM.
If anything this highlights the growing dissension within National and makes it quite graphic. Next up: “Connell wags his tongue to the media”.
Look forward to an interesting week in politics. My Fairfax shares are a’ glowing.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:16 pm
I agree that the Caucus needs to be disciplined and united behind the leader. It is disquieting that Connell still maintains that it was not him that leaked the Brash Affair caucus discussion to the media. There are still un-resolved security matters, perhaps they should employ a good Private Eye to carry out a security audit and associated enquiry.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:21 pm
Kent,
For a National Party supporter, you really do have a strange way of expressing your support.
The media lapped up Labour Party spin that Don Brash’s leadership was at stake last week. It wasn’t. The media lapped up Labour Party spin that Brian Connell was a symptom of major National Party ructions. He wasn’t.
You won’t see National Party members objecting to Brian Connell’s suspension. The guy has proven himself in recent weeks as a shit-stirrer, and a walking hand-grenade. The caucus knows him to be pure liability.
Labour has its own liabilities as well. If only they had the guts to act so decisively, they wouldn’t be cruising towards defeat quite so rapidly.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:22 pm
What exactly has Connel done? Last I heard, he had denied leaking the Brash Affair story to the media. Didn’t the media’s decision to publicize the affair come as a result of Don’s own press release? Frankly, my opinion of the current front bench of National is that they are incompetent inarticulate pretenders and I will always suspect their judgement and the judgement of a caucus that allows such incompetents to remain in position.
I would like to hear the actual case against Connel before I join the chorus applauding the guilty verdict. Apparently he has the support of his local constituency. Why would he have that if he is the damaging fool he is portrayed as?? Maybe what he was saying made sense. Knowing the bumble fisted style of National Party decision makers, this would seem to me to be the most likely reason he was suspended.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:22 pm
It is disquieting that Connell still maintains that it was not him that leaked the Brash Affair caucus discussion to the media.
Maybe it wasn’t Baxter. Now there’s a radical thought.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:25 pm
They had to do it just to keep up the illusion that it was Mallard and Connell to blame for Brash’s behaviour.
And to reinforce the Brash mode of leadership, my way or the highway. How many has he gotten rid of now?
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:30 pm
“And to reinforce the Brash mode of leadership, my way or the highway. How many has he gotten rid of now?”
See.. why the fuck give these leftist cretins the ammunition???
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:31 pm
Redbaiter:
No other National Party MP commented on the discussions of that caucus meeting, except Brian Connell. That took a degree of stupidity and ill-discipline that simply isn’t acceptable as a National MP.
Brian Connell’s subsequent statements that he did not leak the caucus discussions aren’t credible.
It also isn’t credible that National should lay out its case in a public forum against Connell, anymore than Labour should have to lay out a public case against Phillip Field. If either caucus wants to expel an MP for any reason–and the reason would only ever be that the MP was a major liability–then they should be free to do so.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:34 pm
Cretean,
There was once a time when Helen Clark was able to put her stamp on the Labour Party. She systematically rid the Party organisation of the Moore camp, and fashioned the Party in her own image. She was so successful at it that she is now in the position of leading a dying Government with no talk of succession–because she has killed off all their aspirations, and neutered possible contenders.
It’s very rich for a left-winger to snipe at National for enforcing discipline and focus with a view to winning elections. Don Brash has nothing on Helen Clark in the control-freak stakes.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:37 pm
Integrity and honesty! So Brain Connell told the truth and now he is suspended from caucus.
Vote:Good on Brian Connell keeping the good people of NZ what a 2 faced rat Don Brash really is.
If you don’t believe Mr Connell ask Brashes last 2 wives!
September 26th, 2006 at 1:39 pm
Welcome back, Cadmus.
Have you spoken to any New Zealand First MPs recently about their history of extra-marital activities?
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
Integrity and honesty! So Brain Connell told the truth and now he is suspended from caucus.
Vote:Good on Brian Connell keeping the good people of NZ what a 2 faced rat Don Brash really is.
If you don’t believe Mr Connell ask Brashes last 2 wives!
September 26th, 2006 at 1:40 pm
Redbaiter – he is a loose cannon but I have to agree, from my interpretation I believed he had asked a question in caucus and stated quite clearly he had not made a comment to the media, if Connell hasn’t released this then where did it come from?
Vote:As I said a loose cannon but if he is working for his constituents and doing a good job of it then tread very careful people.
September 26th, 2006 at 1:43 pm
Phone call about 9pm last night….
Gerry: Hi Don, Gerry here….Gerry Brownlee, look Don we have a Caucus meeting tomorrow and you need to do something to make it look like you are still the leader of the National Party.
Don: Good idea what do you suggest? Shall I bring along morning tea like I normally do?
Gerry: Don you need to do something decisive about that Brian Connell.
Don: Brian Connell?
Gerry: Yes you know, the MP for Rakaia who spilled the beans after our last Caucus meeting.
Don: Yes that’s right, OK, what do you suggest?
Gerry: Kick him out! Suspend him!
Don: But that’s a bit harsh Gerry, not the sort of thing I like to do.
Gerry: Tell you what Don, I’ll do it and let you take all the credit.
Don: Great idea, thanks Gerry…
Gerry: Don one more thing….bring cream buns this time, I am a bit sick of scones.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:44 pm
culma:
Don Brash has said that Connell’s suspension was not because of statements that he made to the media, but because of subsequent public comments he made on the record, which were completely inappropriate.
Nobody else made public comments about that meeting. When you’re a back-bench MP with a reputation for shooting your mouth off, you don’t go continuing to shoot your mouth off about sensitive issues without the expectation of some punishment.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 1:48 pm
Kent:
If Clark “ski[s] off a cliff at Treble Cone and splatter herself onto the rocks below” – as you so charmingly put it – then Cullen becomes Prime Minister, and then things get very interesting as folks start jockeying for the leadership going into the next election. Which is of precisely zero relevance to the matter under discussion.
Connell pretty much fucked himself as soon as he breeched caucus confidentiality, but that’s just the latest in a string of destructive interviews he’s been giving undermining policy and the leadership. Just as nobody was surprised when John Tamihere finally hung himself with that interview – it was just the last straw after a string of increasingly embarrasing gaffes and public attacks on his own team.
It comes down to this: You can tolerate bastards in politics, but dumb bastards with verbal diarrhea? Never.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 2:00 pm
“You can tolerate bastards in politics, but dumb bastards with verbal diarrhea? Never.”
Must resist kicking ball into open goal…..
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 2:09 pm
Craig,
I really don’t think Labour has the energy to win another election. I think the focus is on what’s up with National. They have two years to get it together to prove their worth as a possible government contender. They certainly have the MPs that most of the country would prefer to see making the decisions. We’re talking silver spoons on velvet cushion stuff here: It will be handed to them without a fight.
The only thing that can get in National’s way is if it doesn’t get its act together and the system clogs up with minor parties peopled by disgruntled National party MPs like Connell.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 2:21 pm
Kent, I have to say that National’s behaviour over the last two weeks does not inspire confidence in their capicity to govern.
The pledge card issue was a gift but when Labour finally retaliated they fell apart.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 2:22 pm
That hair style will be a real loss to the National Party Caucus. At least they still have Muzza McCuzza, Don Brash and Judith Collins (among others) to keep up appearances.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 2:24 pm
That hair style will be a real loss to the National Party Caucus. At least they still have Muzza McCuzza, Don Brash and Judith Collins (among others) to keep up appearances.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 2:29 pm
IP – if this is the case then Connell already knew this was coming then?
Was there any clarification where the information leaked from the National caucus meeting, actually came from, this is of more interest to me than the general house keeping of the National party?
Frau Clark seemed to be well briefed as the story was released but also anticipated the direction (very well I might add) of the discussion, If I had to place a bet on it, Id be putting money on the nose that Grizzelda new more about this than most of the National caucus.
Maybe she’s had a few “Exclusive PI’s” at her disposal over the last few months also.
Connell is a loose cannon, either he needs to learn how to be part of a team or maybe he could do better as an independent candidate?
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
How dare you insult the leader of Luscious Locks in Parliament. What a silken mane.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 2:42 pm
Sonic – *you* think they fell apart, but then you’d believe that water falls up and you have six fingers if it supported your ideology. You have a remarkable ability to colour your perception based on what suits you (or you simply talk rubbish for propaganda purposes).
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 2:53 pm
Camryn if I may expand on my “fall apart” line.
Which party has suspended a member in the last week?
Which party has a leader who is generally agreed to be on his last legs.
About which party has it been reported that 25 members of it’s caucus want it’s leader gone yesterday?
Which party has had to ditch a major donor group after they have been exposed?
All that after a couple of week’s pressure, not a good look.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 3:04 pm
- The Connell suspension has nothing to do with Labour ‘retaliation’. It has a lot to do with Connell. It is interesting, though, that you implicitly acknowledge that Labour retaliates to genuine democtratic concerns (corruption) with smear (raising personal matters in the house).
- “Generally agreed” is what you’re hoping for. In reality, it’s not generally agreed.
- 25 members? More specific bull is still bull. Do you have a source?
- They’re not a major donor group. You just made that up.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 3:05 pm
What a move! Hopefully they’ll kick him out.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 3:05 pm
Graeme Edgeler said:
“IP – I’m sure the PM would like to be rid of Field, but they have a slim majority”.
This is where this gets interesting. Is it really that slim?
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 3:09 pm
ohhhh…. dangit!! Gonna miss that firesy Irish Catholic… Way to kill all the fun and turn National into a pack of sterile old farts…
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 3:43 pm
sad this only helps deflect attention from the pledge cards. National should keep the pledge cards in the news as much as possible until labour pays it back.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 3:48 pm
If, and I repeat If, Connell is teeling the truth about not leaking to the media in the original instance, then it is not really that difficult to imagine that there could well be other interests involved in bringing down the Don… I don’t know – perhaps those that are jockeying to replace him???
I see there has been no mention of Keys’ recent faux-pas bandied about in here…
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 3:50 pm
Graeme Edgeler said:
“IP – I’m sure the PM would like to be rid of Field, but they have a slim majority”.
Yes and we accept them putting power ahead of principals becase we know they are a bunch of self serving pigs who deserve complete contempt for they way they behave. Any principals in Govt would have seen Field ejected and a by-election called, tough call but the correct thing to do – nothing less is democratic !
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 3:57 pm
Gee, I wonder if National have any other stories during the recess that will pre-occupy the media instead? I doubt it.
Labour will dump all it’s bad news now while National are pre-occupied with it’s internal bickering and then sit back and watch the National Party self destruct.
I know I’m right! Watch!
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 3:58 pm
IP, Andrew – thanks for clarifying that! Could be a long, idle two years for the guy… or maybe I mean “another” long, idle two years…
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 4:00 pm
… And just when the media have nothing else to report, Helen Clark will comment on National’s self destruction just to throw petrol on the fire.
I can see a National Party problem solving flowchart coming…
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 4:00 pm
Listen carefully for I shall say this only once:-
A well placed source whose name I cannot reveal has advised that the PM’s PI has Don’s Office, cellphone, computer and the room where the National Caucus meets all bugged. She does know what is going on before anyone else.
Said source claimed he was hired through a series of cutouts but has traced the funding back to the SIS.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 4:03 pm
Why would the SIS not just do it themselves David?
After all that is what they get paid for.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 4:03 pm
Sonic,
You said:
Camryn if I may expand on my “fall apart” line.
Which party has suspended a member in the last week?
National. Just a week after Connell’s inappropriate conduct. Labour has taken more than twelve months to do nothing with Taito Phillip Field’s very dodgy behaviour.
Which party has a leader who is generally agreed to be on his last legs.
Generally agreed by the Labour Party. Not generally agreed by the National Party, who elect him, or the public, who have given him overwhelming support in the polls, over and above the Labour leader. National’s polling, and Brash’s polling, has consistently increased over the past couple of weeks, despite Labour’s attempts to smear him.
About which party has it been reported that 25 members of it’s caucus want it’s leader gone yesterday?
Again, Sonic, just because the Labour Party makes baseless claims, does not make those claims true.
Which party has had to ditch a major donor group after they have been exposed?
If you’ve got evidence of the Exclusive Brethren being a major “donor group” to the National Party, then produce it. Unless you can, you haven’t got a case. Again, Sonic, stick to the facts, rather than inventing new lies.
All that after a couple of week’s pressure, not a good look.
Look at the polls, Sonic. 52% of voters say that Don Brash was right to call Labour corrupt, versus 38% against. 74% say Helen Clark was right to call Don Brash cancerous, versus 20% in favour. 43% of voters say Don Brash has handled himself well in the past few weeks, versus 30% for Helen Clark. Labour and Helen are down; Brash and National are up.
Really, sonic, you make it far too easy. The only reason that Helen doesn’t have any competitors to the leadership is not because she’s been doing a good job. She hasn’t. She’s failing woefully, to the extent that she’s had to take a week’s “holiday”. If she hadn’t purged all possible contenders over the past seven years, her leadership would be in question now.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 4:04 pm
deniability sonic, deniability
Vote:I bloody well hope they don’t get paid to spy on NZ politicals of the oppositional kind
September 26th, 2006 at 4:06 pm
“leadership is about leading”
Leadership is about judgement.
Mr Connell says he wants to earn his way back into the National Caucus. This is possible. I think Maurice Williamson may have had his Caucus membership suspended (or was that from the Party) and was restored to the National Caucus (or Party) when Don Brash became leader.
Connell’s only hope is that a new National Leader might be able to push through an “all is forgiven” solution if Connell has kept his head down and mouth shut. New Leaders like doing things like this – it’s like a Royal pardon – good publicity and one-in-the-eye for the old leader. Plus it avoids a fight in the electorate that might generate bad headlines.
It’s largely up to Connell now. Will he take the punishment and stay quiet or go rogue.
Realistically he must earn his way back into Caucus prior to any leadership change, for if it is done without his vote then he is probably stuffed for any new Leader owes him nothing.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 4:10 pm
David, every intelligence service in the world does not just spy on the opposition, they spy on the govt too.
Read spycatcher.
IP, I do not expect you to agree with me. Don Brash could be getting burned at the stake by the whole caucus and you would still be assuring us his leadership is stronger than ever.
Indeed being a loyal party man you will no doubt be saying the same thing until 30 seconds before he is ditched.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 4:13 pm
Just as you would for your Dear Leader sonic. Pots and kettles etc.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 4:25 pm
Sonic:
I can say right now that if Don Brash was not thumping Helen Clark’s Labour Party in the polls right now, after all the mess that Labour have brought on themselves; if Labour was still digging its own holes as it is now doing after mis-spending more than 800k+ in taxpayer money without any National hits; if National was allowing Labour to get off scot-free with Taito Phillip Field; if National’s caucus was in complete actual disarray; and if Don Brash wasn’t receiving the overwhelming support by National members and the public alike, then I would be the first to be calling for his head.
But that’s not the case. Don Brash has doubled National’s party vote since becoming leader. He is thumping Labour in the polls. Overwhelmingly, polls are showing that he has handled himself far better than Helen Clark has over recent months.
Those are undeniable facts, sonic. Brash’s performance has been superb. Helen Clark has presided over a dying, dispirited, corrupt and inept Labour Party that is prepared to legislate its own illegal activities, and whose only lifeline is a strange mish-mash of Winston Peters, Peter Dunne and the Greens.
The only people calling on Don Brash to resign is the Labour Party. In this climate, seems like a bloody good reason to keep him on. You wouldn’t be making up lies about how shaky his leadership is if he wasn’t such a huge threat to you.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 4:26 pm
To Sonic
Which party has suspended a member in the last week? Probably should be the party that has a member cooling his heels while facing criminal charges.
Which party has a leader who is generally agreed to be on his last legs. H1 is failing in the polls and the eyes of the NZ public
About which party has it been reported that 25 members of it’s caucus want it’s leader gone yesterday? Damn sure many in Labour are looking for a way to see her go. Goff is keeping very quiet will he plans for his takeover.
Which party has had to ditch a major donor group after they have been exposed? well the unions are now bankrupt since they spent all the money last year, so H1 is now trying to ditch them through legislation to prevent private funding and just grab public money instead.
Vote:So Sonic, just who is in the worse position?
and remember; Pay it BACK.
September 26th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
Good job that KKKonnell is gone.
Vote:Just ignore sonic. He lives in a state house on the dole with his Penthouse magazine. He is terrified of having to get a job and contribute to the economy.
September 26th, 2006 at 4:51 pm
You have it wrong swifty, I live in a penthouse with my state house magazine.
xxx
S
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 5:22 pm
IP said: “If she hadn’t purged all possible contenders over the past seven years, her leadership would be in question now.”
really IP, who are the possible contenders that you alledge Helan has purged?
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 5:31 pm
A nice old fart like Don can still kick a head in,like Connels, pity for connel, Don kicked his head in, if a nice old fart like DON is a stud , he could be a wily old aggressive pitbull, my thoughts
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 5:32 pm
Hot dog!This Don Brash is looking sexier by the minute.I like a man with muscle.
Vote:Message to Don … don’t equivocate.Blow the cordite off your manly hand and move along..Phwooaaargh. Or is this a slightly insensitive comment at the moment?
September 26th, 2006 at 5:33 pm
Sonic’s retort is untypically witty.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 5:38 pm
For a recent photograph of sonic, go here:
http://www.wiredvideo.net/images/screen%20grabs/alecwoods.jpg
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 5:39 pm
sonic was good ,I THINK?????maybe not, i thought,
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 5:39 pm
For a recent photograph of alec ‘sonic’ woods go here:
http://www.wiredvideo.net/images/screen%20grabs/alecwoods.jpg
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 5:41 pm
I am sure when Brash is rolled Connell will be quietly reinstated with a firm handshake and a silent pat on the back “thanks, dude, for taking the fall for me”
Although perhaps Murray doesn’t use the word “Dude”?
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 6:01 pm
Sean, 49%.
I win.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 6:05 pm
Ok well this is excellent news.
Now that NZF has imploded, the Nat’s have needed an “electorate seat” party in the regions & provincal towns to counter the Maorimander.
Perhpas Connell – for all his faults – is in a good position to set this up.
I mean, with a little help from sensible centre-right people (1M from the EBs, 5M from telecom, say) it would be quite possible to get a party that explicitly campaigned for the electorate steats say in the south island & manawatu, giving an overhang of 3-5 seats….
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 6:26 pm
Blair, you do indeed win.
You get to keep the stinking albatross of Brash hung around National’s neck.
The tag of cancerous and corrosive has sunk into New Zealand’s consciousness and now all that is needed is a slow judicious leak of Brash’s emails to make the tag stick.
Why do you think both the PI and Exklusiv Bruedershaft ‘fessed up on TV? Not out of religious duty not to bear false witness I can assure you of that.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 6:37 pm
Nick Smith behind the Connell ambush…!!! Goddamn.. if there’s anyone who should be fired from National its that useless arsehole Smith. Sold out Conservative principles all the way along the line. Author or co-author of so much freedom savaging legislation. Sits in parliament simpering and giggling like a schoolgirl.. This socialist turncoat has no idea what right wing politics is about, and should have been fired himself years ago. In the little I’ve heard from Brian Connell he sounds alright to me, especially with his reported determination to put the interests of his electorate above the interests of the National Party. Given that so many of the Nats are overt socialists, I can well understand this decision and also why his electorate is so far sticking with him. Could it be he is that rare thing amongst politicians, (and especially National politicians) a man of courage and principle, and is this the real reason why he is the victim of a sly ambush by the craven compromising socialist Smith and his acolytes???
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 7:26 pm
“Ok well this is excellent news.
Now that NZF has imploded, the Nat’s have needed an “electorate seat” party in the regions & provincal towns to counter the Maorimander.”
This strategy is fundamentally undemocratic. Overhangs distort the proportionality of Parliament. What is needed is the abolition of Maori seats in parliament and possibly increasing the size of parliament. As for NZF being an electorate seat party its never had more than one electoral seat since 1999.
“Perhpas Connell – for all his faults – is in a good position to set this up.” It will be interesting to see what happens if Connel does try and set up a new political party. However I have doubts as to wether or not such a party will suceed.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 7:26 pm
The curse of a good education is having to live in a world full of f*ckwits
Vote:The Swift Man (2006)
September 26th, 2006 at 7:44 pm
A bit off track, but just noticed in a list of all ( and I mean all) Privy Coucillors it lists Simon Upton?.Now thats the classy way to get rid of someone if that were the case
Vote:http://www.angeltowns.com/town/peerage/02PrivyCouncils–UK.htm
September 26th, 2006 at 8:08 pm
‘Fraid not, Rostock – it’s just a way to put more letters in front of their name. For example, Helen Clark and Winston Peters are both “on the Privy Council”.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 8:23 pm
The curse of a good education is that I have to live in a world full of halfwits
The speedy Swift Man
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 8:28 pm
For Matt: the Swift Man is definitely not speedy
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 9:13 pm
slow down , and have a good wine, RELAX,check the blood pressure.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 9:44 pm
Well it’s one hell of a way to stop everyone talking about the Exclusive Brethren … notice how that story’s had virtually no legs today.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 10:31 pm
The Connell dismissal?
No interesting facts are public yet.
The subtext to the story is: the hapless Mr Brash is now frightened, clearly.
Mr Brash is stacking his caucus numbers. Simple. He is scared and necessarily gearing for the real caucus battle down the road.
Mr Brash is a boob. His ‘style’ swings from hapless to manufactured ‘command & control’.
His decision does two things: 1) amongst those who oppose Mr Brash’s leadership, it strengthens caucus resolve against him; 2) it improves Mr Brash’s numbers inside caucus by 1 (for now) – though this is like the NASDAQ: the numbers will change again for sure.
If Mr Brash could be persuaded to do to you what he did to Mr Connell, would all of you Brash- apologists on this blog still side with him?
Honestly, no. I do not think so.
Will Mr Brash survive? No. He will be ‘knifed’by his caucus stealthily in classic Tory fashion. Wait and see. It just wasn’t the moment yesterday. Although it is now about time.
The Connell story is a side-show. A calculated distraction. It will come back to bite Mr Brash in his philandering glutei.
Installing discipline – you protest? No. Mr Brash is not naturally a man of discipline (politically, on policy, or sexually)
This story has other unintended consequences perahps. Many of Mr Brash’s ‘recalcitrants’ come from the South Island. NZ is a small place. The South Island is smaller. So is the set Mr Connell is a part of. Revenge should come.
A wrong move for the now clearly frightened Mr. Brash. Guarantee it.
More revelations about Mr Brash will follow in the next few weeks. The least the hapless and often trouserless Mr Brash could control (for the moment) is one caucus voter. This is not a big story. Is it.
Guarantee it.
Best,
James.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 11:10 pm
James wrote:
If Mr Brash could be persuaded to do to you what he did to Mr Connell, would all of you Brash- apologists on this blog still side with him?
First, it was a secret ballot of the entire caucus which would suggest that Connell’s fucked off a few more people than Don Brash.
And here’s a reality check for you, James. I was a regional office holder in the Young Nats for five years. I was certainly involved in my share of what’s euphemistically knows as the ‘free and frank exchange of views’, and certainly wasn’t on the winning side of every vote. What I never did was breech the very confidentiality that made open debate possible in a fit of pique, let alone do it over and over and over. If I had, I fully expect that I’d have been rolled (quite properly) and replaced.
And it’s nice to see James has at least stopped signing his posts “For a winning National Party”. Seems he’s finally beginning to get the hint that voters are rejecting his losing strategy of back-biting and sleaze.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 11:19 pm
James…
49%
How’s that for a winning National Party?
I win again.
Vote:September 26th, 2006 at 11:55 pm
Well, call me a cynic but I haven’t seen any proof that Connell was the leaker. In fact, Don’s comments in the Herald suggest they know he wasn’t.
If I was truly cynical, I’d say that Don was using his current boost in the polls to crush Connell (A maverick with no support base) as an object lesson to Key, Powers, English, Rich, et al…
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 12:12 am
Craig writes:
“Seems he’s finally beginning to get the hint that voters are rejecting his losing strategy of back-biting and sleaze.”
back-biting & sleaze, Craig? Get ready:
Let us start with Craig’s ‘back-biting’:
Back-biting: this is what has happened to the recalcitrant MP Connell. Was he not censured rather meanly, Craig? Yes. He incurred a ‘back-bite’. The suspension, in fact, is more a symptom of Mr Brash’s mind-set at the moment and less predictable or important business inside the NZ National Party. Mr Connell is being ‘punished’ (no doubt he deserves at least part of this). Mr Brash has not been – yet. I would argue that the hapless Mr Brash’s transgressions within and without the NZ National Party merit greater sanction. This will occur soon.
Craig uses ‘sleaze’: are you ready, Craig?
Here is your sleaze, Craig: this is the phenomenon surrounding Mr Brash – there is a cheapness, a certain tastelessness when it comes to the opposite sex and the furtive, zipperless Mr Brash, a serial philander, or ‘cad and bounder’. He has been found out cheating on his 2nd wife (whom he married after cheating on his 1st wife). The guy has little integrity.
Christ! Craig. What part of the sleaze about Mr Brash do you not comprehend?
No argument, Craig. None. Your man sleazes.
Character gentlemen. Character …is everything. And you know it (you conveniently dodge dodgey Don’s dirty dealings, don’t you. Why?)
There can be no argument for his good character. Not publicly.
Blair:
49%
51%….yawn…make it 65% … I want you to feel good before I tell you how errant you.
Polls, mate. Polls. Blair and his beloved polls. N = 1200. Method: Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing. In the evenings well before the key stories developed (still developing). What could be wrong with a poll?
If you believe this poll could be useful to predict the outcome of any election, then you need a CT head.
Play with your poll mate, but do not try to market it.
This NZ National Party have yet to win a national election. At the last election, many centre-right voters returned to the fold in spite of Mr Brash, and because of Labour Government Policy. No argument.
You compare apples and oranges. Or PM Clark and the hapless Mr Brash.
Any attack by a man named ‘Blair’ seems anything but ‘winning today!. Blair is on his way out ……. with his dependency on polls.
I joyously reclaim my rightful moniker:
James,
For a Winning NZ National Party.
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 12:26 am
Wow, the National party of old would have stumbled and fumbled with this issue, trying to present themselves as a unified ‘goody two-shoes’ party, even though the majority of voters would have seen right through it.
Vote:However, in this instance they actually took much needed decisive action!
Could there be hope for National yet?……..
September 27th, 2006 at 12:31 am
Little RedFox
says of the MP for Rakaia, Mr Connell…’a maverick with no support base’.
Really, Red Fox? You seem confident.
- excepting, of course, the nearly 21,000 out of 36,000 voting New Zealanders in Rakaia who voted him Mr Connell 1 year ago. That is twenty-one thousand voters.
It gets better, Little Fox: his margin was over 10,000 voters. I’ll spell it out mate: ten thousand more people voted for Mr Connell than for his nearest rival. Jesus!
This man has a proper constituency. (Unlike the appointed and hapless Mr Brash) Get it?
Blair – read that number above (it’s no poll number – it is real -’21,000′. Each number is potentially very very very active – all 21,000 of them). Different than polls isn’t it, Blair.
Honestly, guys. You can seem politically clueless alot of the time here. Wise up.
What do you think is going to happen in Rakaia?
Who lives in Rakaia? What type of people do you imagine them to be? Why don’t you find out?
I know more about my country than most bloggers here, I suspect.
Try and keep up.
Best,
James,
For a Winning NZ National Party
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 1:47 am
James,
Actually, you’re making many assumptions. I’ve spent many a pleasant afternoon in Rakaia and while I don’t know it well, I am certain I know it better than most.
My comment re the support base was referring to the fact that Connell is not closely identified to the two main (and oh so subtle) camps in National working to replace Don Brash with their good selves.
As it happens, I am aware that Brian enjoys good constituency support – we have no argument there. I’ve run into Brian on several issues and while we never agreed, I have to say that he was willing to argue the topics rather than avoid them as several other MPs of all stripes have done.
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 1:48 am
James,
Actually, you’re making many assumptions. I’ve spent many a pleasant afternoon in Rakaia and while I don’t know it well, I am certain I know it better than most.
My comment re the support base was referring to the fact that Connell is not closely identified to the two main (and oh so subtle) camps in National working to replace Don Brash with their good selves. It is in the caucus that he lacks a support network, hence the successful anti-Connell vote (Mind you, I suspect more than a few either agreed with him or simply weren’t willing to take a stand either way)….
As it happens, I am aware that Brian enjoys good constituency support – we have no argument there. I’ve run into Brian on several issues and while we never agreed, I have to say that he was willing to argue the topics rather than avoid them as several other MPs of all stripes have done.
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 2:17 am
James,
49%. That’s the real current support for the National Party, no matter how you spin it. Yes, Brash is doing such a terrible job. Imagine how high it would be if he wasn’t leader! 60%? 70%?! What a burden he must be to them!
Come now James, you really are debating angels on pinheads now. 1200 is a huge poll sample. Are you seriously trying to discredit the poll? Are you that rabidly anti-Brash that you don’t think an 11 point lead over Labour means anything? Silly question, of course you are!
But maybe you’re right. Maybe going from 27 MPs to 48 had absolutely nothing to do with their new leader. Y’know, those are “real” numbers too! Wonder what National was doing differently between 2002 and 2005? Could it be… aw naw it couldn’t be Brash, could it? Nah can’t be, he’s “bumbling hapless boob” right? Must be. James says so. Even with an eleven point lead.
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 2:27 am
James, how high would National have to be in the polls before you would concede Brash is doing a good job as leader? Be honest. I’m interested.
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 5:14 am
Blair challenges:
“how high would National have to be in the polls before you would concede Brash is doing a good job as leader? Be honest”.
This is a loaded question: first, you assume that there is a causal relationship between your polls’ numbers and the performance of the hapless zipperless Mr Brash. I think his rather effete performance as an MP and current leader is at best only one factor (if it is at all), and strongly disagree that it is the only factor or that the relationship is causal. I will grant you that N = 1200 is not to be sniffed at though. But its still a poll. This is one of Mr Farrar’s blind-spots also.
I most strongly dispute the implication often seen here that Mr Brash is the NZ National Party. Be careful about ambiguous statements, guys. A lot of Nats here confuse the two. The hapless Mr Brash is first a member of that party and then a highly placed list MP for that Party who subsequently rolled another member of that party to assume his current position in that party. Mr Brash is not the NZ National Party. Period. Its simple. Got it? Or the NZ National Party is not Mr Brash. Simpler?
Your favoured number is 49%. Let’s examine this:
Government Performance
Approve 38%
Disapprove 49% (no mention of your man)
Party Support Electorate Vote
National 49% (up 1%) (1% ! and no mention of your man)
Labour 38% (steady)
Party Support Party Vote
National 49% (up 4%) ok – 4% Whow! and still no mention of your man)
Labour 38% (down 5%)
None of this data takes into account the Exclusive Brethren Allegations (ahh oh!!). Get the real picture yet, mate? Yeh, I think you kinda do, now.
Whatever you argue, Little Fox, your hallowed poll is nothing more than an imperfect snapshot of a moving target – yesterday or whenever it was. It is no more real than last Tuesday. Less real, it can be argued.
Next time we are going to focus on the hapless Mr Brash. For he must surely go. And go he shall. Why?
Because, he is an electoral liability for a winning NZ National Party.
And party politics must first be about winning.
And many voters are turned away by his elitist sexagenarian licentiousness. (ok – a bit long-termed, but this guy is a bit perverse, and was from the get-go, I argued)
You want to defend Brash? Do. Not a poll. But your choice of leader. Defend the individual. But to debate the hapless Mr Brash is to discuss character. So, begin.
Now we are beginning to define the terms. Soon you will see how right I am.
Best
James
For a Winning NZ National Party.
If an election were called tomorrow, National would come in okay…but second (again).
Campaigns are very different, mate. They require, among other things, leadership. Mr Brash cannot do it. (nor, I will argue, should he be allowed to)
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 5:36 am
Blair, Fox, Craig et al
Real numbers? Here’s an indication of the types of numbers National need (again):
More than 21,000 kiwis, voters at elections, NZ National Party supporters, Southerners, the good folk in Rakaia – a great part of our country, have watched their choice of MP – Mr Connell – get rather meanly censured by an aging rather elitist presbyterian former bank administrator of rabid personal ambition and no moral compass, who prefers lists to the real work of an MP, prefers multiple affairs to party policy, and is shy of House of Commons appearances.
Trust me – it aint gonna wash, folks.
It just aint gonna wash.
I guarantee it.
Brash is in more trouble than he’ll admit to you or I.
The more I read from the Brash – Apologists here, the more I believe they are writing their own obituaries.
Few of them seem politic enough to survive their blind loyalty to this individual, not the Party.
Best
James
For a Winning NZ National Party
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 6:42 am
James – you are falling for the trap labour are trying to set. sorry to blog whore dpf but the argument is set out on my blog.
In essence you are falling for the labour line that Dr Brash is divisive and failing. He took over in oct 2003, made the orewa speech in Jan 2004. National went up in the polls by 17%. absolutely unprecedented. National is now sitting on 45-49% and has 31% of Labour voters believing their government has acted corruptly.
It was widely believed the election was unwinnable 6 months out because the economy was doing fine. Dr Brash and National came within a whisker.
Labour are trying desperately to nail Dr Brash so they can turn their lies to John Key. Their strategy is to demolish the 2 publicly plausible leaders of National by personal attacks and lies. It is fatuous to think the personal attacks would stop if Dr Brash was rolled. If National campaigns on the issues, including corruption, lies, fraud then they will demolish Labour in the next election.
Your heart may be in the right place but you have been absolutely suckered by the spin from the left in the same way as Richard Long and Hooten.
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 7:16 am
James wrote:
More than 21,000 kiwis, voters at elections, NZ National Party supporters, Southerners, the good folk in Rakaia – a great part of our country, have watched their choice of MP – Mr Connell – get rather meanly censured by an aging rather elitist presbyterian former bank administrator of rabid personal ambition and no moral compass, who prefers lists to the real work of an MP, prefers multiple affairs to party policy, and is shy of House of Commons appearances.
*ahem* I’d note that the difference between Connell’s electorate vote and the National party vote isn’t large enough to imply the man has any vast personal support out there.
And regardless of who the electors of Rakaia voted for, I’m sure they expect their local MP to be an effective advocate for their interests. Someone who can’t even be a constructive presence in his own caucus has a giant question mark over his own head – and Connell has nobody but himself to blame for it being there.
To look at the other side of the House, (Harry Duynhoeven’s electorate support consistently exceeds Labour’s party vote. In large part, because he’s regarded as an effective and hard-working local MP. Compare and contrast Philip Field. Even in a Labour stronghold like Mangere, over 1,300 Labour party voters didn’t tick the box for Field last year. And the electors of Tamiki Makaurau weren’t impressed enough by John ‘front-bum’ Tamihere’s conduct to return him to Parliament.
Someone who has
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 7:33 am
Excellent, Craig.
Tell us then – what is your Mr Brash’s electorate vote?
James
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 7:46 am
James, you pathetic little troll. I realize that you have very serious mental issues, but surely medication is the solution rather than public displays of obscene self pleasure. I believe you refer to Brash’s zipper and trousers (or lack there-of) every few lines like a little boy that has found a Penthouse and keep running off behind the shed.
Your faux moral indignation is up there with your “support for a winning national….”
Quick note to you and your boss: The AG is about to report that you guys nicked our cash to buy votes…… even the most dumb of thieves keeps their hands in their pockets while being interviewed by the cops. So why do they still use our money to fund the likes of you?
People like Sonic and Ben Wilson will argue that the moon is pink, if that is the party line, but they have the integrity to be honest with their allegiances, you are just having a moral wank while hiding behind lies.
You sad fool.
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 7:48 am
… “Mr Connell had again failed to show the restraint and discipline expected of a caucus member…”
and Don Brash has again failed to show the restraint and discipline expected of a married man…
No matter what is said about politicians’ private lives not being open for discussion etc. voters will not forget this so-called rumour in the next election, bye bye Don
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 8:10 am
James:
LOL… I guess we’re going to get a diatribe about how MMP is all Don Brash’s fault now? You’re so predictable… you can’t actually rebutt anything I say, so it’s time to fire off some feeble weapons of mass distraction.
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 8:31 am
Sagenz:
The troubled, hapless Mr Brash – not Labour – will destroy his chance. Mr Brash is self-tripping; he is making Labour’s attack easier for them. This is the nature of character flaws. It will be Mr Brash who implodes – but not the NZ National Party. If the Party continues with his ‘leadership’, I think that it risks failing to reach a plurality/relative majority at the next election.
Between now and then, more damaging revelations about Mr Brash should emerge.
This guy has some perverse habits. He is an odd man. And he is weak on policy. He is a poor communicator. He looks wrong – artful, tricksy, duplicitous … he even looks like a (cachectic) Nixon. Importantly, he is slightly elitist for too many New Zealanders, elitist by background and by choice. He talks of his and his father’s Presbyterianism, while fornicating with women other than his wives. Yes – he is a serial philanderer. He cheats on his wives – and with impunity, it seems. Female voters will punish Mr Brash – no argument, mate. His behaviour will not have many female voters inured to cast their ballot his way. He is shy of the House of Commons. AWOL -it appeared. Even given all of this, I think it will soon be shown that Mr Brash has lied to the New Zealand public and members of the National Party about any involvement with the Exclusive Brethren. This will not be his low-water mark though. I predict that the hapless but increasingly harassed Mr Brash will make a further public slip (so revealing his true character, again) – one that every National Party member and/or supporter will smart from. It’s all about character, guys. Mr Brash’s character is wrong for this job. Simple. His character will trip him up in the end. That is really what’s being played out here. Character.
Mr Brash’s character. It ain’t a good one.
Now, Mr Key – maybe, sure
Mr Brownlee – maybe
Mr Power – maybe yet
Ms Rich – also
Mr English – why not?
And many many many kiwi voters and poll interviewees tick yes or mark with a cross a NZ National Party box because of NZ National Party MPs other than this awkward, zipperless former bank administrator.
The hapless Mr Brash’s incumbency has been controversial within the NZ National Party from the get-go. It’s now getting much worse for him.
I strongly believe that he is not worth the risk.
Your poll numbers are not about Mr Brash. Your poll numbers are about Government and Opposition. They are unreliable predictors of an electoral contest. And they are old numbers. Properly pre- the Brash Affair and certainly pre-the latest Exclusive Brethren allegations.
The Connell affair is a convenient public sideshow by Mr Brash, and a nervously executed flesh wound for any caucus opposition to his continued leadership. Flesh wounds don’t kill.
Best,
James
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 8:43 am
vanzylnz,
But you know I’m right about your Mr Brash’s character. That is important.
Best,
James
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 10:52 am
From this morning’s Ashburton Guardian editorial: “Without understanding the full inner workings of the party process, it’s hard to tell, but it certainly seems, at face value, that not being part of the caucus would be a serious impediment to Connell being able to effectively do the job that the people of the Rakaia electorate elected him for.
Given the prevailing political persuasion in this region, it seems fair to say most people who voted for Brian Connell did so based not on who he was but because he was the National candidate. Those people clearly see a need for a strong National presence, an MP playing an important role in moving the party forward.
The needs of the electorate must be paramount now. In making his decision, Connell needs to be completely honest with himself about whether he can continue to play that role.
If he can’t unequivocally answer in the affirmative, it’s time he made way for someone who can.”
I would say that the editorial would be a fair reflection of what the average person in Rakaia would be thinking.
As for Connell’s majority discussed earlier in the thread, the winning National MP in 1999 (Shipley) won by approx 8,000 votes, Connell won in 2002 by 6,000 votes and then again in 2005 by 10,000 votes. There is certainly nothing which indicates any real swing to Connell, only a reflection of what happened in pretty much every provincial electorate around New Zealand. Besides, the Labour candidate was Tony.
In conclusion, Connell is a lazy MP who has false perceptions of his ability and importance. National will be far better off with someone who will work hard for the electorate and the party.
Vote:September 27th, 2006 at 11:43 am
To the troubled, hapless James,
You state that Brash is “…an electoral liability for a winning NZ National Party.”
Why is National polling at 49% under his leadership then?
Why does the Herald Digipoll taken last weekend, when the revelations you mention came to light, not back you up?
If an election were held today, National would win and Don Brash would be Prime Minister.
You are trying to argue that Brash is not doing a good job. Well… such things are measured by opinion polls are they not? They are certainly not measured by the grouchy, disgruntled rantings of blueberry Nats like yourself.
By all means, argue that Don Brash is a man of poor character. While I disagree with you, and will argue against it, I think it is a not completely unreasonable opinion to hold. But frothing and ranting that Brash is not able to sufficently win support for National from the electorate is clearly horseshit.
That’s what a 49% poll rating and an 11 point lead over your oponents means, hapless James. You can’t keep ignoring that reality to continue pursuit of your ridiculous diatribes.
Vote:September 28th, 2006 at 3:09 am
To ‘Blair’ the Poll-Harlot:
Blair, you are not telling the truth to readers about your polls:
Your latest Herald Digi-poll results pre-date the Exclusive Brethren Allegations.
Your belief that the polls speak the truth is weird. It is uncritical of you, ill-informed, and uni-dimensional. Politics is multi-dimensional, mate. You show foolish faith in two false gods (Polls & the hapless Mr Brash).
Your hallowed Digi-poll showed -
Preferred Prime Minister:
Ms Clark 51.3% (Jesus!)
Mr Brash 24% ( whow: less than 1 in 4!)
Mr Key 21% (ahh oh!)
Mr English 15.8% (still!)
Your Herald Digi-poll sampled 400 people N = 400!!!. And it was a snap poll. (Good God!)
Its declared margin of error was ~ 5% (holy shit!) 5%….!
And you believe that your polls are The Gospel.
Read below and learn:
1. Your poll numbers are not about Mr Brash. Your poll numbers are about Government and Opposition. They are unreliable predictors of an electoral contest. And they are old numbers. If your polls accurately reflect reality, it is yesterday’s or last week’s reality. Where are you now, Blair? Without a poll, you – you poor hapless poll-junkie – do not know. A poll would orient you. No?
2. Next, you should consider the following:
a. sampling errors?
b. measurement errors???
c. non-response rate? etc…
3. I most strongly dispute the implication you seem to be making here that Mr Brash is the NZ National Party. Be careful about ambiguous statements, Blair. I repeat: the hapless Mr Brash is first a member of a party and next a highly placed list MP for that Party who subsequently rolled another member of that party to assume his current position in that party. Mr Brash is not the party. Period. Its simple. Got it? Or the NZ National Party is not Mr Brash. Simpler? Stop merging the issues, mate.
3. You lean on the vagueness of the term ‘leader’ whenever you mention the hapless Mr Brash. How? Well, the fact that an individual is nominally a ‘leader’ is not to say that he/she is a leader (as you seem to think)- i.e. that he/she is demonstrating leadership qualities, or that he/she should lead (arguably, Mr Brash is an undemocratic appointee, and shouldn’t have become ‘leader’). Mr Brash is not actually a leader – not in any faithful report of the most widely accepted meaning of the word. Oh, sure, Blair, he is leader (for a few more moments) but only nominally, ‘ leader’ is a title only for the hapless Mr Brash. But most kiwis are now seeing that Mr Brash is …well, hapless. You cannot teach leadership, mate. Nope. Your Mr Brash just ain’t got it.
4. Character assessment is natural. It is not a ridiculous pursuit. It involves a combination of reason, intuition, emotion, experience etc. Human faculties all, mate. But you prefer Computer-Assisted Systems and their Results. Polls! Yet, most folk think politics is a very ‘people-focused business’; Blair – where does that leave a guy like you? Poles/Polls apart from reality, I would argue.
Character matters, Blair. Its relatively unchangeable – unlike….your polls.
Best,
James
Vote:September 28th, 2006 at 4:56 am
National are not a winning party yet. They have not won anything in a quite some time.
Right party.
But the wrong man.
Change this combination and chances will alter.
Further, if National won while the less than honest and somewhat hapless Mr Brash was ‘leader’, it would ‘gift’ the Prime Ministership to an appointee (of poor character but rabid personal ambition, and elitist by background and choice).
That’s a dangerous precedent and not so relevant to a youthful, striving nation.
I think kiwis are sympathetic to some change of Government after several terms (and Labour make us weary because they are noisy (but effective) counter-punchers), but are increasingly wary of Mr Brash and of a National Party ‘under’ Mr Brash.
Besides, Mr Brash is increasingly revealing himself to New Zealanders. We see him more, and we don’t trust him so much. (I never did – from the get-go).
Change within this party is needed.
Best,
James
Vote:September 28th, 2006 at 7:38 am
James really let the mask slip when he wrote this: We see him more, and we don’t trust him so much. (I never did – from the get-go).
LOL… we couldn’t tell. The only change the National Party needs is to keep isolating malicious (and cowardly) panty-sniffers like you from any real position of influence. And that’s what is really burning you up, isn’t it? That you’re so impotent, even outright irrelevant, you’re reduced to raving anonymously in the comments box of this blog; and even here, you’re regarded as a tiresome sleaze continuing to defend the indefensible.
Vote:September 28th, 2006 at 10:21 am
I have to agree with Craig (for a change). James makes no reference to Labour’s election spending rort. Tis not someone who should be taken too seriously. And I wish he would stop with the mock outrage at Brash’s alleged affair. It smacks of envy.
Vote:September 28th, 2006 at 12:07 pm
*yawns*
More boring crap from the hapless James. For someone who doesn’t believe the opinion polls matter, you spend a lot of time whining about them.
Vote:September 28th, 2006 at 11:08 pm
Ross –
are you unaffected by your Mr Brash’s licentious personal behaviour? Do you sanction his behaviour? He will fall by such behaviour. In his political obituary, they will analyse his character – it’s his undoing, mate.
Blair the Poll-Whore –
polls are your nourishment – not ours. Polls, polls, they tell Blair his truth. You are a blind man. No numbers – no opinion, for Blair (yawn).
Craig –
you spew pyschobabble in your postings. You portray yourself as an angry gay man projecting childhood traumas upon an unsuspecting public. Its boring, mate. No-one cares. Its all childhood and adolescent testimony with you here. You are a case. When will you take up the art of argument, discussion, civil debate. I have asked you numerous times here to argue the case for Mr Brash. You refuse to. Instead, you are bilious, unhinged, and unfocused. That’s not good enough.
Your challenge here is to offer a cogent argument why Mr Brash is a leader, or why he ought to remain leader of the NZ National Party. Simple, mate.
Get writing, Mr Injury. No excuse. State your position with premises etc.
None of you dweebs can. You are kinda pathetic political dilettantes.
I’m having a laugh at your expense.
None of you can win against me wrt your hapless Mr Brash.
Best,
James
On the Winning Side of NZ Political History.
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 12:06 am
James:
*yawn* Keep telling lies about me and smearing my family, James, because I won’t stop telling the truth about you. Everytime we’re subjected to another one of your rancid diatribes, your own status as an emotional cripple with a very unhealthy fixation on the sex lives of strangers is displayed for all to see. It’s also psychologically interesting that your vulgar insults tend to revolve around prostitutes (“Blair the Poll-Whore”) and faeces. Where’s that coming from, Jimmy? What’s so profoundly threatening about being disagreed with, challenged with arguments and facts, that it brings out the temper tantrums with monotonous regularity?
I’ll leave a professional to diagnose what fever swamp that’s coming from, but it’s boring and frankly more than a little creepy.
Seriously, get some help – you’re a very troubled little man.
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 12:25 am
I bet James builds up strong muscles from all that one-handed typing… on both hands…
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 3:18 am
To the Brash-Apologists – Blair, Prick & Craig:
Sore losers, gentleman.
I defeated Blair’s argument by numbers. He has stopped quoting his poll percentages at us, thankfully.
I called Prick’s disorder. He cannot be cured though.
I question Craig’s ability and will to argue the case for Mr Brash. He lacks an an ability to write an argument. He likes Mr Brash’s position and performance but cannot tell us why. Craig has a secret.
Ad hominem ad nauseum from the 3 Brash-Apologists.
Debate better, gentleman. I am fencing off 3 of you twirps/wimps. 3:1 and I am prevailing.
What is so superior about your hapless Mr Brash?
Best,
James
For a Winning NZ National Party
P.s. once the hapless Mr Brash gets rolled, you three apologists are going to be obvious, easy and final targets. Can’t wait for that minute.
A veritable slaughter.
Want to shut me up? Try offering a sound argument for keeping Mr Brash as ‘leader’ of this Party.
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 3:33 am
Reasons to replace the hapless Mr Brash-
Here again for the Brash-Apologists are my reasons for claiming that Mr Brash is unsuitable as current leader of the NZ National Party.
All legitimate, acceptable and relevant premises:
Mr Brash is/has
1. an undemocratic and opportunistic appointment to the House and National Party leadership
2. of an elitist background
3. a bank administrator without natural political skills
4. a record of never having one an election
5. a relatively poor communicator
6. noted for frequent absences from the House of Commons
7. not in possession of a clear idea on Party Policy. It is perceived as one weakness of his.
8. despite his self-professed Presbyterian background, admitted to having had affairs on his wives. This hurts his wife, his family and his public reputation as a leader who can be trusted. Character becomes relevant.
7. a weak protest (so far) of any involvement with the Exclusive Brethren. Character is also relevant. His trustworthiness has become an issue in the minds of the kiwi public.
8. sporadic ‘command & control’ type management style of the party caucus. ( Mr Connell, Ms Rich etc)
9. self-tripping in front of colleagues and the media
Disagree? Why?
James
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 3:38 am
apologies for the typos
best,
James
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 3:49 am
Vernon Small’s cautious op-ed in yesterday’s Dominion Post makes many of these same claims (as others do)
It’s kinda forboding for National & Mr Brash, I think.
Yet the 3 Brash Apologists still squeak!
Best,
James
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 6:48 am
James:
Please see previous comment – despite your claim above, I’ve responded to all your assertions above in detail. Adding flat out lies to your usual brew of hysterical abuse won’t change that. Troll on, James.
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 9:12 am
Ross – are you unaffected by your Mr Brash’s licentious personal behaviour?
Well…yes! Just as you are clearly unaffected by Labour’s election spending rort. I wonder if the latter is resonating more with voters than unsubstantiated allegations concerning Dr Brash. I’ll let you decide.
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 9:16 am
Oh, and I’m a long-time Labour voter, so why you refer to “your” Mr Brash is really puzzling.
Vote:September 29th, 2006 at 9:16 am
Ross:
What, you mean you haven’t had an affair with Don Brash while James was peeping through the curtains? I’m shocked…
Vote:September 30th, 2006 at 12:05 am
Craig says –
” I’ve responded to all your assertions above in detail”.
Craig – no you haven’t. Where?
You are a flat out lier.
James
Vote:September 30th, 2006 at 7:19 am
James:
Being call a liar by you is like Britney Spears calling you a bad parent and a no-talent exhibitionist. Your relentless chutzpah is hilarious, so just keep trolling on.
Vote:October 1st, 2006 at 12:02 am
I see the lying guilty Craig is so sensitive to the accusation that he lies on this blog, that he felt he should post his reply (but not a denial that he is a lier) twice.
I’ve gotcha mate.
Your credibility is shot. Lier.
Be well,
James
Vote:October 1st, 2006 at 12:06 am
I see the lying guilty Craig is so sensitive to the accusation that he lies on this blog, that he felt he should post his reply (but not a denial that he is a lier) twice.
I’ve gotcha mate.
Your credibility is shot. Lier.
Be well,
James
Vote:October 1st, 2006 at 7:58 am
James,
49%
When that number dips back into the thirties, then your attacks on Brash might have some credibility. Until then he is performing. Shut the fuck up.
Vote:October 2nd, 2006 at 5:23 am
I seem to be hitting home, guys.
Blair’s writhing in obvious pain at my attacks – if Blair’s obscene language on this blog is anything to go by!
The Brash-Apologists are disturbed, and beginning to panic. I feel good.
Blair – despite my counter-arguments about polls, you’re still a poll-harlot. Unbelievable.
Further, you fallaciously merge your beloved hapless Mr Brash with our NZ National Party.
That man is not the Party. The Party is not that man.
You misinterpret the results of an imperfect measurement: the poll. 49% or 94% … its not at all a judgement for the hapless Mr Brash. Disagree? Show me the direct questions relevant to this individual in these polls.
You cannot.
You should stop being so obstinate and foolish. Wise up.
Brash is self-destructing very publicly actually.
After he’s gone, where will that leave the likes of you?
I feel your pain.
Best,
James
For a Winning NZ National Party
Vote: