Could Shane waka jump to NZ First

October 18th, 2012 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

On Tuesday evening I was walking past Mac’s Brew Bar and sitting outside having a beer were Winston Peters and .

It got me thinking.

This is purely speculation, but it would solve issues for both men.

It is no secret Shane is not happy in Labour. He was furious with Shearer for calling in the Auditor-General. A number of women MPs there want him gone. He just clashed with Clare Curran on copyright parody exceptions. The grapevine suggests the Auditor-General’s report on his immigration decision may not be good for him. He will have a sense of grievance as I suspect he was told to let Liu become a citizen, as it will be good for Labour – and he now sees himself as the fall guy.

So with probably no future in Labour (does anyone think Shearer will make him front bench again?), but having undoubted political talent and smarts, could he prosper elsewhere? And NZ First is hardly likely to have objections over his ethical behaviour with citizenships, considering the Owen Glenn affair.

So what is in it for Winston (he is effectively the sole decision maker here)?

Well to give Winston credit he has defied the odds and survived multiple sackings and even being thrown out of Parliament in 2008, to come back in 2011. He has shown he is the great survivor. So what is the challenge for him now?

Well it is all about legacy, and his ultimate legacy would be a political party that can carry on without him, leaving him as revered founder. He is closer to 70 than 60, and can’t be keen on more than a couple more terms.

Now with all respect to his current caucus, none of them are up to taking over as leader. Some of them are competent and doing okay such as Tracey Martin and even Andrew Williams. But none of them could get 5% of the party vote.

However Shane Jones possibly could. He appeals to the same demographics as Winston, and are not that far apart on some policies – especially hating political correctness etc.

Could Jones defect to NZ First and become Deputy Leader (a job still vacant a year later), and heir apparent? He would add a couple of percent to the NZ First vote, and position them well to appeal to voters. If they hold the balance of power in 2014, then he is a senior Minister, and if Peters retires in 2017, leads NZ First into the next election. Fishing companies would be lining up to donate, and a fair few Iwi also I suspect.

Now this is all speculation, and there would be challenges, But it would give Jones a future, and would give Peters what he most needs – a party that can survive without him.

What do you think?

Tags: ,

62 Responses to “Could Shane waka jump to NZ First”

  1. jims_whare (403 comments) says:

    The only problem I could see is that if Jones defects it would be a chilly day in hell before he would be offered a ministerial role in a Labour coalition.

    I don’t think the factions that make up Labour are the forgiving type and they would rather have one of Winnies Chimpanzees as a Minister before Jones.

    However if 2014 is very close and Peters decides to support the Nats (If Key is desperate) then I suppose it is a possibility.

    Maybe Jones should start up another party with John Tamihere and call it the Left right out party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. capitald (72 comments) says:

    Very interesting theory – we need someone like Shane Jones in Parliament. He could be very effective inside NZ First – probably more than he would be inside Labour. He is hardly likely to get inside Cabinet through Labour anyway – defecting to NZ First would actually give him a very good chance – especially if he is a leader with the deciding votes on forming a Government.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Keeping Stock (10,339 comments) says:

    I had dinner at the Green Parrot some months ago. Whilst I was enjoying my massive plate of food, Peters entered with a flourish, with handshakes with all the staff, and in the company of Shane Jones.

    I would not regard Jones’ defection to NZ First as a long shot. Labour has made it clear that Jones has no future with them. And he has far more personality than any of Peters’ Class of ’11, which is important given that NZ First is entirely dependent on WRP’s flawed personality.

    Jones is also one of the more right-leaning Labour MP’s. If he were to become leader of NZ First and Winston was to retire, the objection that National has to dealing with Peters would be gone, and National would have a potential coalition partner.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Alan Johnstone (1,087 comments) says:

    Aren’t they second cousins? More likely he was just having a beer and chilling out.

    Macs isn’t the place to have a serious conversation

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    If it wasn’t for his motel indiscretion he might have had a chance. Winston is pretty old fashioned. Don’t think he’ll get the nod. Winston has nothing to worry about from Labour, no threat at all. Why would he bother with Shane Jones

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    Yes, John Tamihere would be awesum for NZF. Isn’t he far too socialist though ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. AG (1,827 comments) says:

    What do I think? That your insight on this issue is as likely to be accurate as it was here (http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/05/is_jones_jumping.html) and here (http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2012/08/where_in_the_world_is_shane_jones.html).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Pete George (23,559 comments) says:

    Would Jones do bugger all better with NZ First than with Labour? He seems to be an MP who has continually failed to live up to expectations.

    His apparent lack of ability to work with a team may not be out of place as NZF leader but I don’t know if it would do much for the party as a whole.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Nostalgia-NZ (5,202 comments) says:

    Speculation is free. However, I was disappointed with Clare Curran’s attack on SJ.
    Also I think Labour have mightily restricted themselves by not utilising SJ.
    I also think his ‘fall from grace’ was so slight in the overall context that he has been persecuted for it out of all proportion.
    Shane Jones doesn’t readily fit into Labour’s identity crisis, and Labour is so stupid in not recognising that as a symptom of why they have lost their way with the electorate.
    David Shearer may have a background in peace keeping but there is a time in life, and politics, when a good old fashioned stoush gets people’s attention and makes them watchful in the future. He doesn’t look like he’s got his party by the throat and see SJ sidelined indicates that for all to see.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. IHStewart (388 comments) says:

    The current NZ First line up are hopeless. Ron Marks was a significant loss and yes Jones would be a good replacement. Could Jones leading NZ First get Marks to to return ? Winston also was spotted having a beer with Michael Laws prior to the last election.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    WTF are you doing Farrar recommending this wanker Jones for any party?????

    Its a condemnation of our parliament and our democratic system that this sleaze bag sits in the house as a representative of the people.

    Caught ripping off the taxpayer by getting them to pay for his porn movies and he apparently has no shame for this event?

    That’s he is still on any kind of government payroll is a pointer to the fact that if it doesn’t lift its standards for MPs, our democracy is on the fast track to disaster.

    Jones doesn’t need to be in NZF or any party, he just needs to get his fat useless defrauding arse out of parliament and off the taxpayer payroll altogether.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Colville (2,268 comments) says:

    Its an interesting concept.
    Would Winny step aside in ’14 to allow Jones to rule and thus let Nats invite them inside the tent?

    It would give Key and Co options and they are going to need them if they are to get back in.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    I’d always picked John Tamihere as a potential waka jumper, not that he’s in the Labour waka to begin with, having been pushed out and currently being repelled with a three metre barge pole as he tries to reboard. That is, if he doesn’t decide to swim off in the general direction of the National Party and inflict himself on the blue team instead. If Jones keeps his nose clean and commits no more major gaffes, he should be back in Labour’s senior parliamentary echelon, particularly if there’s a narrow loss to National in 2014.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    “That is, if he doesn’t decide to swim off in the general direction of the National Party and inflict himself on the blue team instead.”

    Proving just what a revolving door totalitarian fraud of a political system we have, and what a farce our democracy is, when National are so similar to Labour members can just walk from one to the other without even a change of suit.

    Long past time we the people broke free of the grip of the elitists in media and parliament who drive the political process.

    Long past time National dropped the progressive image and stood up for the principles that underpinned its birth as a political party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. KiwiGreg (3,255 comments) says:

    LOL @hinamanu – Peters has the morals of a gutter fish, wanking off in a hotel room would be quality behaviour for him

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. peterwn (3,271 comments) says:

    I thought Winston did not like Waka hoppers – he insisted Labour outlaw the practice.

    Redbaiter – if National stood up to its ‘principles’ as you see them, National would be consigned to the political wilderness for ever and ever amen. This is the sort of thing left wingers demand of National.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Oh please, Redbaiter! John Tamihere is not at all ‘progressive’, given his dodgy outbursts about women and LGBT people. Added to which, he’s anti-union, anti-welfare, supportive of charter schools and has all the fiscal conservative values of true blue National Party voting chief executives across New Zealand. He’s far more compatible with National than the Labour Party.

    Moan, not the elitist/populist divide again, either. Muldoon’s been dead for the last twenty years and as for Winston, once he retires, NZF is defunct. That is, unless Tamihere has yet another change of his political orientation and is ordained as Winston’s annointed successor. Moreover, if National was captured by sock con ideological purity apparatchiks, it would spell the end of its status as a broad, pluralist mainstream centre-right political party. Under proportional representation, elections are fought and lost on the middle ground. In New Zealand, the middle ground is metropolitan, social liberal, pluralist and secularised, take it or leave it. This is not America, or Australia. Perhaps you’d be happier in either political environment, I’d suggest?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    ” if National stood up to its ‘principles’ as you see them, National would be consigned to the political wilderness for ever and ever amen.”

    Thanks for that useless gutless and unsubstantiated assertion. You don’t, in your strategic ineptness, have a clue what you are talking about.

    If National stood up for its principles, and argued them and articulated them and put them squarely in front of voters, (as Maggie Thatcher and Ronald Reagan once did) it may well have the long term run in parliament that it enjoyed when it was first formed.

    Its submissive cowardly arseholes like you peterwn, who stand for nothing except compromise and defeat on every social issue out there, and who are ever ready to dance gaily and unwittingly to the Marxist tune, who have allowed the left to completely dominate the political system to the extent that we are now a virtual one party state.

    This has to change or else we may as well give democracy the complete arse and surrender totally to the soft tyranny of Progressive/ Marxist socialism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    If National stood up to its ‘principles’ as you see them, National would be consigned to the political wilderness for ever and ever amen.

    Are you proposing National continues its drift to the left? Do you ever envisage the party regaining its centre-right principles?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Chuck Bird (4,883 comments) says:

    I think if Tamihere is rebuffed because of the feminist and homosexual factions he Labour he could go with NZF. If he and Jones both went for NZF it would be likely they would go with National as Labour would not want either of them to be ministers. NZF policy is for a referendum on the Maori roll. I think such a party would make a far better coalition partner for national than the Maori Party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    “Oh please, Redbaiter! John Tamihere is not at all ‘progressive’, given his dodgy outbursts about women and LGBT people.”

    “Progressive” actually has a much wider political definition than just being in the thrall of squealing activist queers and front bummed feminazis.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. RRM (9,919 comments) says:

    Or it could have been just two guys who work in the same industry, sitting out in the sun in front of Mac’s having a beer because it was a good day for it…?

    [Wot, they didn't invite you over to join them? :lol:]

    It would certainly be a good move for NZ First.

    Shane Jones could never be another Winston, but it’s easy to imagine him as his younger, fitter, more professional-looking sidekick. More a Sgt Lewis / Inspector Morse relationship, than a Robin / Batman one…

    Oh and somehow, I doubt Winston could give a flying f**k about what happens to NZ First after he departs the scene!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Yes, but British society has changed since the days of Mrs Thatcher, and the Conservative Party has commendably changed to recognise the new social realities and embraced pragmatic centre-right social pluralism and diversity. These are not the eighties and authoritarian populism is a prehensile ideology, whose practitioners are shamelessly opportunist. In New Zealand, it is mostly now associated with Winston and the militant fundamentalist Christian lobby. As for the United States, it has long since turned into an economic basket case, largely due to the ineptitude and incompetence of George W. Bush. The Republicans are so addicted to the fix of opportunism and militant fundamentalist Southern votes that they’ve probably lost California forever, for example.

    Redbaiter, you’re like a bizarro version of the turkey Trots that used to pester the Alliance on the far left of our political spectrum, mouthing ideological purist platitudes and behaving as if you and your fellow true believers are some sort of vanguard party of the right. In fact, that’s the general problem with sectarians of all stripes, left or right. Ideological purity is seductive and seems virtuous to its self-anointed practitioners, but it doesn’t win elections. I loathe Chris Trotter for much the same reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. thedavincimode (6,759 comments) says:

    The ability to ensure an ordered succession of dodginess has to be an issue for Peters. He may well have found his man.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Which one, mate? Tamihere or Shane? Somehow, I think Shane Jones is too level-headed to jump ship. JT, on the other hand…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. RRM (9,919 comments) says:

    DVM –

    I would never vote for him but with Winston at least it’s a *likeable* kind of dodgy dishonesty. The man has more charisma than most of the rest of the house put together. I’m no fan of his politics, but he’s probably a hell of a guy to go out on the turps with..

    Shane Jones is also a good-looking guy in a suit, but he’s just a bit vanilla by comparison. All I really get from him is images of a darkened hotel room and a scene that could be straight out of American Pie…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Shane Jones might be embarrassing and awkward on occassion, but his gaffes are just laddish. Tamihere is a retrograde git and would be ideally suited to the clammy, foetid embrace of Winstonism.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    “Yes, but British society has changed since the days of Mrs Thatcher”

    Yes, for the obvious worse. We’re going to change it back again.

    “Redbaiter, you’re like a bizarro version of the turkey Trots”

    Thanks for that worthless assertion. Like all left wing zealots, you have very few cogent arguments, and your main strategy is always argument ad hominem designed to paint those who challenge you as outliers. This is total deceit.

    In fact, when there was a comment rating system operating on Kiwiblog, my views were always well supported. Same goes for Whale where I also comment. (In fact i probably have the consistently highest approval rating there) These are the two top rating political blogs in NZ.

    So your claims about what is popular and what is not are complete bullshit. We the people will take back power from the grip of duplicitous little progressive/ Marxist propagandists like you, and we will do it by speaking out and articlating the ideas that you seek to suppress. Suck on it loser. (and that’ll be nothing new for you)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. RRM (9,919 comments) says:

    Thanks for that worthless asSertion. Like all left wing zealots, you have very few cogent arguments,

    Does that mean you’re now going to explain how we are going to restore conservative values in New Zealand, and how that’s going to fix all of our society’s problems?

    ‘Cause Wedbaiter would NEVER stoop so low as making “worthless asSertions” – right?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. RRM (9,919 comments) says:

    These are the two top rating political blogs in NZ.

    So that’s why you continue posting and link-whoring here, despite the David Farrar hate campaign you’re running on your own site, Wedbaiter?

    What a malignant shameless little two-faced weasel. Statements by Winston Peters have more integrity than anything you’ve ever written on here.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. Alan Wilkinson (1,878 comments) says:

    This time I disagree with Redbaiter. Jones would be a lot better for NZ First than their current crop and has more intellectual honesty than Peters whatever his recreational interests.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    Manolo- note no answer from peterwn to your excellent question.

    He’s probably frenetically busy writing complaint letters to Farrar about how he’s been “offended”.

    “This time I disagree with Redbaiter.”

    Welcome your disagreement Alan. However I think we are too tolerant on parliamentary standards. Too much lowlife in the house by far.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Yes, Red, I’ve been repeatedly told that I’ll be the first one against the wall when the Great Objectivist/Marxist/Christian Reconstructionist/Matriarchal Revolution comes, by apparatchik sectarians of many assorted political stripes, be they Randian Objectivist pseudo-libertarians/ZAPpists/militant Christian fundamentalists/lesbian seperatists/Trots and Maoists. The problem is that all of those constituencies are outliers and I get identical flak from all of those doctrinaire souls. Amusing, really. And if the militant fundamentalist Christian brand of social conservative ideological purity is so attractive, then why has National lost every election since 1987, or been forced into toxic coalition circumstances, when it has foolhardily succumbed to it, and then has had to reassert pragmatic centrist pluralism within its caucus and party organisation?

    Remember 1987…1996…2005…?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Ye gods, RRM, did you really just juxtapose “Winston Peters” and “integrity” in the same sentence?! I can think of far more cogent word associations that would be vastly more appropriate- “opportunist,” “embittered old sod,” “rent a bigot” and “leader of a personality cult” are the most immediate…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    And incidentally, I have a possible explanation for Red’s apparent ‘popularity’ on such fora. It used to be called ‘phone blitzing’ when it came to squawkhack radio. To phone blitz, activate one’s organisational phone tree to render the appearance of ‘mass popularity’ when it comes to particular political philosophies that one concurs with. Or, get them to click the right indicator button on a given website…?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    The momentum is changing dearest. You have no prescient ability whatsoever, otherwise you would detect that steadily growing change and the increasing momentum.

    Progressives are on the slide. Many of them, walled in their little liberal information and intellectual fortresses like you, just don’t know it yet.

    (Keep up the desperate flailing tho. I need the laffs.)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Griff (7,694 comments) says:

    weddy
    Whale thinks you are a tosser
    Your political blog comerarty consists of you and around 4 well-known suckarses and gets less views than Philu!
    You regularly get many more posts on here making fun of you than you get in agreement.
    You support New Zealand first for fundies else wise known as CCCP.
    You have yet to answer questions as to how you will inflict your ideology on the rest of us putting you in the same box as P Tarnish.
    And you look really bad in stilettos buy some flats next time.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Wow, prescient ability! Sorry, mate, I deal in cold hard empirical fact.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    No, empty assertion based on wishful thinking and a closed mind is your stock in trade.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Griff, I’m sorry, that sort of mental image should be banned by the Geneva Convention as a cruel and unusual punishment or form of torture (ie Red in high heels!) :0

    But let me close this conversation with a useful citation from Conservative UK MP Jesse Norman…

    Cameronian Conservative MP Jesse Norman is a defender of Cameron’s “Big Society.’ He made an interesting statement about marriage equality in the pages of the New Statesman that referred to different “moral communities,” with different “individual, institutional and divine notions” about what constitutes an “ethical law.” In seeming to endorse pluralist conservatism, Norman noted that “Conservatives…have a degree of respect for all of those three communities.”

    Source: Rafael Behr: “Impeccably Conservative” New Statesman: 5-12 October 2012: 31.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    “Cameronian Conservative”

    Thanks for the laff. Cameron is just another cowardly liberal wank job like John Key who is going to feel the lash of the awakening sense of betrayal in the electorate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Hamnida (905 comments) says:

    I see Redbaiter is concerned about a couple of $15 porn movies, but far less worried about the Finance Minister’s housing allowance rort which ran into the $10,000s.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    Btw, by the next two elections in the US, the Tea Party will own the Republican Party, and if “cold hard empirical” facts are what you want, then you’d best stop relying on the one sided cant propagated by the liberal media liars that apparently dominate your present information sources.

    That’s the trouble with you commies. You wall yourself in, and you attack and try to denigrate anyone with an “unapproved” opinion, and you’re so intent on that path of action, you don’t see that those you try and suppress are gradually attracting more and more support.

    Here’s a cold hard empirical fact for you to chew on- You’re done. Maybe not now, maybe not in eight years, maybe not in ten, but its coming. The destruction you have wrought will have its eventual political repercussions, and there is no way you can survive those repercussions.

    There’s only you and the usual gang of tiresome dumbarsed blind freddies trolling here who can’t see that inevitable outcome Guy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Bob (497 comments) says:

    In spite of being a National supporter I like Shane Jones. He seems to be a person who tells it like it is. Most Labour members simply repeat the party line. Jones will talk about an issue logically even backing up a National approach. He doesn’t go in for propaganda. Yet he is a Labour man who doesn’t like National.

    I think he would be wasted in NZ First. He is probably too independent for any party.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Red, I’m a Foucauldian, not a marxist. There are differences- Foucauldians tend to be far more pragmatic. And I do find your rhetoric amusing- it’s rather similar to other apocalyptic ravings by other sectarians in other political contexts. I’m not trying to suppress anyone- they self-sabotage, usually. Tell me, which brand of raving right sectarian are you, do tell? Are you one of those quaint souls who believes in a bastardised version of early Scientology (ZAP)? Or a Randian? Or a Christian Reconstructionist? Or a Lyndon LaRouchite, a breed fortunately unknown in New Zealand but unfortunately present in Australia- who believe Elizabeth II and Prince Philip are sinister machiavellean figures at the crest of an evil International Conspiracy to flood the world with sex, drugs, rock and roll, bad SF novels and the environmental movement? Or a Davidickian, who believes that the house of Windsor are actually a breed of reptilian shapeshifters?

    Do tell me which breed of the above you are. I haven’t had so much fun trying to guess your actual conspiratorial lineage in ages!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Redbaiter (8,823 comments) says:

    “Red, I’m a Foucauldian, not a marxist.”

    Ha ha.

    The fact that here you believe you need to ingratiate yourself with dumbarsed warmist trolls and otherwise politically confused fuckwits like Grief tells me all I need to know about what you are Guy.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    I prefer the title ‘Could Shane Jones wanka jump to NZ First?’ it seems to cover everything I really need to say about this.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    I still think Tamihere would be the most likelier contender for wanka jumping (to use Lee’s delightful phrase- well done, that person!). At least Shane Jones conceivably might have a future within the Labour parliamentary caucus. As for the Waipareira Trust CEO, I would invite you to contemplate the mental image of a small wizened brown creature (no, not him, someone rather more cinematically appealing) plaintively repeating: “JT, phone Win! JT, phone Win!”

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Griff (7,694 comments) says:

    Btw, by the next two elections in the US, the Tea Party will own the Republican Party and hence become unelectable

    Politically confused is someone who backs a party like cccp because of the conservative in the name not their actual policy’s

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    And as for Colin Craig, it’s time for spin that policy! Today’s subject, asset sales!

    What is Colin Craig’s stance on asset sales? Does the Conservative Party leader…

    (A) oppose asset sales, as it states on his party website:

    -Conservative Party: http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz

    (B) oppose asset sales, but wouldn’t let that get in the way of a coalition with National if it meant keeping the centre-right in power?

    -NBR Staff: “Conservative Party’s Craig willing to stand in Epsom, ally with National” National Business Review: 07.05.2012.

    -”Colin Craig determined to keep National in power” 3 News: 07.05.2012.

    (C) opposes asset sales, and backs the Labour/Green CIR petition against asset sales, even given that that’s the core of National’s social spending and government finance policies?

    -Colin Craig: “Binding Referenda can’t come soon enough” Scoop: 27.06.2012.

    Apparently, all three. That is, depending on which month it is, and whether its core objective of binding citizens referenda can be advanced to support its primary aim,, which is the enforcment of sectarian fundamentalist religious social conservatism… and nothing else matters.

    This isn’t serious politics, it’s the mythical Tudor “Vicar of Wakefield“, who changed his denominational affiliation every successive reign- from Catholicism (Henry VII) to Anglicanism (Henry VIII and Edward VI) to Catholicism (Mary I) and back to Anglicanism again (Elizabeth I).

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. orewa1 (410 comments) says:

    Three people is a threesome. Four people is a foursome. Shane is handsome.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. RRM (9,919 comments) says:

    You’re done. Maybe not now, maybe not in eight years, maybe not in ten, but its coming. The destruction you have wrought will have its eventual political repercussions, and there is no way you can survive those repercussions.

    But what does any of that MEAN, reddy? Do you even know?

    Good militant conservatives are going to march all the leftists out into the woods and line them up for a classic central-european style ethnic cleansing?

    Muslim invasion and sacking of the western world?

    Communist world domination?

    A Republican President of the USA?

    Any time you decide to start fleshing out your meaningless rhetorical bluster with details that make it worth having a discussion about, I’ll be all ears.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Mark (1,488 comments) says:

    Manolo (7,846) Says:
    October 18th, 2012 at 10:03 am

    If National stood up to its ‘principles’ as you see them, National would be consigned to the political wilderness for ever and ever amen.

    Are you proposing National continues its drift to the left? Do you ever envisage the party regaining its centre-right principles?

    Manolo when has national ever been a centre right party. Through history it has at best been centrist. We dont have a party of the right currently and not sure that we will ever get one.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    Yes, Mark. I stand corrected.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Barnsley Bill (983 comments) says:

    If he manages to avoid prison over the cash for passports scandal he will replace the first of winstons nobodies that quit

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Reid (16,447 comments) says:

    The only problem I could see is that if Jones defects it would be a chilly day in hell before he would be offered a ministerial role in a Labour coalition.

    I don’t think the factions that make up Labour are the forgiving type and they would rather have one of Winnies Chimpanzees as a Minister before Jones.

    Very interesting idea DPF. It’s interesting some commenters above seem to hallucinate that because DPF raises this as a possibility he’s therefore approving Jones, which of course in the real world, are in fact two completely ideas. I hope those commenters don’t similarly hallucinate that I’m saying the same thing below because I’m not.

    Yeah but you’d be surprised how the prospect of the Treasury Benches makes prior enemies into friends, especially if there’s a Maori Party/NZF alliance in the offing to once again freeze out the total mentals (i.e. The Gweens). Those numbers won’t appear in 2014 but they might in 2017. (They won’t appear because the Nats will be weakened but not totally destroyed but they will be totally destroyed in 2017.) Personally I have always rated Jones not because I think he’d be any good in power but because he’s a capable politician, unlike many in Liarbore. Just as I also rate Peters, Tamihere and Cunliffe and why I don’t rate Little or Shearer.

    It’s certainly true Jones would struggle with the Sisterhood/LGBT faction against him 24/7/365 and using their evil machinations to undermine him at all turns (which those nasty pricks would most certainly do). So Liarbore leadership is definitely out, as it might be for Tamihere whom the Sisterhood probably rate lower than Jones – unfortunately. I don’t think however Tamihere will give up on Liarbore becuase his lifelong driven ambition is to be the first Maori PM. (I wouldn’t be surprised if some of his drive comes from his brother’s situation – that would certainly provide lots of emotional impetus.) I also think Tamihere has enough smarts to make a popular end-run around the LGBT so even though they will hate his guts his popular support will mean they can’t do anything about it. Jones doesn’t have that ability in the country-wide electorate, but Tamihere does.

    Of course there are significant hurdles not least Liarbore’s internal leadership election structure, Little, Cunliffe and said Sisterhood/LGBT. But if he can overcome all of those by 2017, imagine a Tamihere (Liarbore)-Jones (NZF)-Maori Party coalition. Wouldn’t it be awful. But it is, IMO, possible. And that’s what this thread is about. It is NOT about whether or not anyone approves of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. thedavincimode (6,759 comments) says:

    I would never vote for him but with Winston at least it’s a *likeable* kind of dodgy dishonesty.

    RRM

    There is nothing likeable about Peters. He is an arsehole. The fact that his misfortune provides plenty of opportunity for amusement doesn’t disguise the fact that he is an arsehole. Glen, Vila Bros, helicopters, Kermadec, the systemic abuse of Parliamentary privilege to suit his agenda (employment), the brown paper bags … This guy is a scum sucker of the first order. One of the lowest pieces of shit to emerge from our political slime.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. sparky (235 comments) says:

    There is nothing likeable about Peters. He is an arsehole. The fact that his misfortune provides plenty of opportunity for amusement doesn’t disguise the fact that he is an arsehole. Glen, Vila Bros, helicopters, Kermadec, the systemic abuse of Parliamentary privilege to suit his agenda (employment), the brown paper bags … This guy is a scum sucker of the first order. One of the lowest pieces of shit to emerge from our political slime.

    How right you are, couldn’t of worded it better. Mr cunning, that tells the biggest lies of anyone, and then accuses others. Peters is a joke, and has fooled so many, and still is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. hj (7,011 comments) says:

    There is nothing likeable about Peters. He is an arsehole. The man’s a threat to my capital gains!…… Swinehund!!

    John Carran, 2 April 1996

    “Vehement opposition to immigration, particularly from Asian countries, in New Zealand from an ill-informed and xenophobic rabble persists despite overwhelming evidence that immigration will improve our long term economic prospects.

    In 1988 The Institute of Policy Studies published detailed research by Jacques Poot, Ganesh Nana and Bryan Philpott on the effects of migration on the New Zealand economy. The research, which abstracted from the social and environmental impact of immigration, concluded that “…a significant migration inflow can be beneficial to the performance of the New Zealand economy and subsequent consumption and income levels.” The authors point out that this is in general agreement with Australian research on the economic consequences of immigration.



    Of course there is more to life than attaining economic excellence. The social and environmental impact of immigration also needs to be considered. But here the reasons given for restricting immigration range from pathetic to extremely dodgy. Most of the accusations are barely disguised racist piffle backed by tenuous rumours and cloudy anecdotes. Winston Peters’ stirring of the masses has exposed the ignorance and racial biases of a small and distasteful section of New Zealand society. These people yearn for a cloistered, inhibited, white (with a bit of brown at the edges) dominated utopia fondly envisaged by racists and xenophobes everywhere.

    http://www.gmi.co.nz/news/1021/opposition-to-immigration-why-let-the-arguments-get-in-the-way.aspx

    Savings Working Group
    January 2011

    “The big adverse gap in productivity between New Zealand and other countries opened up from the 1970s to the early 1990s. The policy choice that increased immigration – given the number of employers increasingly unable to pay First-World wages to the existing population and all the capital requirements that increasing populations involve – looks likely to have worked almost directly against the adjustment New Zealand needed to make and it might have been better off with a lower rate of net immigration. This adjustment would have involved a lower real interest rate (and cost of capital) and a lower real exchange rate, meaning a more favourable environment for raising the low level of productive capital per worker and labour productivity. The low level of capital per worker is a striking symptom of New Zealand’s economic challenge.

    http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/reviews-consultation/savingsworkinggroup/pdfs/swg-report-jan11.pdf

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Lee C (4,516 comments) says:

    At the risk of someone invoking Godwin’s Law, I believe Hitler was considered a ‘likeable’ guy by many who met him. It didn’t have anything to do with his political convictions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. KiwiGreg (3,255 comments) says:

    Peters “One of the lowest pieces of shit to emerge from our political slime.” QFT.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    “Peters “One of the lowest pieces of shit to emerge from our political slime.” QFT.”

    But he’s taking out the Nat/Lab 70 year+ paradigm. That should be called innovation.

    MMP is a political industrial revolution and the establishment don’t like it.

    The electorate likes it very much. Getting out of this flipin rut and moving again

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote