Rankin for Epsom

August 4th, 2014 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Conservative’s chief executive has confirmed she will stand as the party’s candidate in

The party published the move today on its Facebook page, saying “Let’s support her and see her as the next MP for Epsom.” It was also announced at a public meeting in Auckland.

This is a reasonably cunning move.

At a minimum it gets publicity for the Conservatives as there will be considerable focus on Epsom.

It also means that it could throw the outcome of the seat in doubt. By this I don’t mean Labour or National winning the seat, but is it possible the Conservatives could win it?

Think about this scenario. It is two weeks to go and is polling 1.1% and Conservatives 2.8%. National looks like it will be say three or four seats short of a majority.

Conservatives point out a vote for Rankin gets 4 of their MPs into Parliament while a vote for ACT gets just one MP. Regardless of what National has said, Epsom voters could decide to vote for the smartest tactical option.

So it will be a very interesting seat to watch.

Tags: , ,

87 Responses to “Rankin for Epsom”

  1. Redbaiter (8,923 comments) says:

    “is it possible the Conservatives could win it?”

    So Rankin, a career public servant who no doubt benefited from progressive programs like affirmative action and has reputedly been married three or four times has suddenly had this radical conversion to Conservatism?

    I’m sympathetic to the Conservatives, but I’m struggling to accept Rankin as authentic.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 24 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. stigie (1,197 comments) says:

    So, are you now changing your vote to Act Reddy ?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. bringbackdemocracy (427 comments) says:

    There are also long term considerations. The Act party have been in decline, probably terminal, for some time. The Conservatives on the other hand, not only have three times as much support, but are a growing party, with phenomenal membership growth.
    The other advantage that the Conservatives have over Act is that they don’t just draw support from National. But are taking votes from Labour, NZ First and the “missing million”

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Zebulon (114 comments) says:

    I’m not really a Conservative Party person but I do think that Parliament needs some fresh blood and that it’s good for a wide variety of opinions to be represented inside the tent. I hope Conservatives get in.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Colville (2,268 comments) says:

    So Rankin attracts 30% the National vote, ACT get the 50%, National 20% (as per usual) and Labour/Green all vote National .

    National wins the seat and Labour wins the election. Cun*liffe must be laughing his arse off.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. redqueen (563 comments) says:

    I agree, DPF, this does have a tactically interesting dimension. However, it remains that Craig is an untested element (in Parliament, rather than the media) and has not ruled out working with the Reds. The same reasons that East Coast won’t vote for him have a similar ring in Epsom, as with ACT you at least know whose side they’re on. Until Craig stops playing footsies all around and nails his colours to the mast, so to say, why take the risk? (Even if, in the end, it’s a few extra MPs, they could simply be propping up a Labour majority – not ruling Labour out was a serious strategic mistake, in my opinion).

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (890 comments) says:

    You know what will happen? Epsom voters will end up voting conservatives and ACT in equal measure and the Labour pest gets in…..Just sayin….

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    So the Conservatives want to kill ACT to get into Parliament?

    That’ll be really great for the political right.

    Way to go, Kolun!

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Elaycee (4,392 comments) says:

    It is two weeks to go… Conservatives point out a vote for Rankin gets 4 of their MPs into Parliament while a vote for ACT gets just one…

    So…… the only way we could avoid a left wing mish-mash of placard waving unionists, fringe lunatics, economically inept morons and ragtag racists would be for the good folk in Epsom to vote Christine Rankin as their MP???

    A chill went right up my spine…..

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. ShawnLH (5,124 comments) says:

    “not ruling Labour out was a serious strategic mistake, in my opinion”

    It was monumentally dumb, and raises the question as to what the CP really stands for. Rankin is not the only issue, the party as a whole is looking dubious.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 22 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. mjw (396 comments) says:

    Fascinating move. Having three or four MPs from the Conservatives, instead of one or two from ACT, could be enough to keep National in power. This way, National can benefit from the Conservative vote without having to lose just as many liberal votes as the price of publicly endorsing them.

    So if the Conservatives win Epsom, National get to have their cake and eat it too. They pick up conservative support without losing liberal support.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. freethinker (691 comments) says:

    The chill running up Keys spine is the thought of the Conservatives winning Epsom bring in more MPs than Winston currently has, holding the balance of power and facing binding referenda which removes governments dictatorial powers and allowing democracy to emerge.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. trout (939 comments) says:

    I am always amazed how outsiders claim to represent Epsom voters. We are a politically savvy lot. We do not need cups of tea, nods and winks, or whatever the journos want to dream up. If the Nats want an Act MP to add to their numbers in the house – because the party vote determines the total and a Nat MP in Epsom makes no difference to NAt MP total numbers – then they will get it. Rankin will be lucky to get 100 votes and they will likely come from Winston’s quota of the ‘aged and bewildered’. Rankin is largely seen as a self promoting loose cannon – colourful but ineffective.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Huevon (222 comments) says:

    This will be interesting to watch…I like Jamie Whyte. He’s a clever guy, and although I don’t agree with everything he says, he is the only public figure calling out the Lefties on their BS and I like that. Trouble is his party. The Conversatives seem to have a strong party, but Colin Craig is an idiot. If only they could combine the strength of both…..

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Nigel Kearney (1,013 comments) says:

    Epsom voters could decide to vote for the smartest tactical option.

    If they are right leaning and smart, they don’t want the ‘Conservative’ party in Parliament.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. deadrightkev (469 comments) says:

    I support Jamie Whyte and Colin Craig as people. Not too keen on David Seymour as he is note mature enough. I think he will get in and leave Whyte stranded on less than 1.3% then become a very inexperienced vulnerable party leader controlled by National. Act would die and that’s not a bad thing.

    Craig will get a good voter turnout by election day I believe, not sure if it will get him over the line but he will get around four times more support than Act so Key could well have shot himself in the foot support wise. I hope Craig gets in because National are progressives and we don’t need two Labour parties.

    Craig would never go with Labour.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    I don’t see National nor Labour agreeing to binding referenda and in any case it would be such a significant constitutional change it couldn’t just be introduced based on the bottom line demands of a small coalition partner.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. kowtow (8,487 comments) says:

    “I don’t see National nor Labour agreeing to binding referenda”

    I can’t see them agreeing either. Giving the people a say in their own lives would be far too democratic. We can’t have that ,can we?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Yogibear (366 comments) says:

    Colin Craig continues to win friends and influence people.

    Lets assume he has aspirations to be a long-term player in NZ politics. There are only two potential outcomes from CC going hard in Epsom:
    1: They are irrelevant in the seat, and this only serves to reinforce their wider irrelvancy, but irritates their only two long term potential allies.
    2: They are highly relevant in Epsom and put a centre right government at risk. That can only lead to ill feeling and mistrust, again, amongst the people who are their only potential allies long term.

    Not overly smart either way you look at it.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Ed Snack (1,873 comments) says:

    I can’t see why people who would vote for a socially liberal and economically “dry” party like ACT could contemplate voting for a socially illiberal and economically “wet” party like the “Conservatives”; except as a tactical exercise. The Conservatives don’t appear to have any reasonable grasp of economics, and apart from their binding referenda nothing much else either. Their appeal is to those who desperately want to see a return to prescriptive conservative morality or those who like the NZF way but for some reason don’t like Winston.

    It’s certainly a tactic that Cunliffe would approve of.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. polemic (460 comments) says:

    Tactically this is a very interesting move.

    Perhaps it is time that Colin came out and said they would not support a Labour led Govt.

    That would then nail a statement to the mast…

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Brian Smaller (4,023 comments) says:

    Well any one whose breasts upset civil servants would probably make a good MP.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Yogibear (366 comments) says:

    Ed – One would have though the concept of binding referenda by definition makes the CCCP economically illiterate

    (or at least unfamilar with basic game theory)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    Um, Brian, she was a civil servant. So if you’re saying that’s a good qualification to be an MP…

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Yogibear (366 comments) says:

    Brian – that was 20 years ago now – she’s going to need more “uplift” to get over the wire (not underwire) in Epsom

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. DJP6-25 (1,387 comments) says:

    Would National,Untied, and Conservatives be worse than Cunliffe and the GIMPs? Assuming ACT don’t win Epsom of course.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Boris Piscina (53 comments) says:

    So how about Rankin takes enough of the disaffected to split the vote one more way meaning that Goldsmith wins the seat whether he likes it or not, Act and CCCP both fail to get anywhere near 3% let alone 5 and thus disappear up their own nether regions, Kelvin Davis wins Tokerau and the Intermaniac lot similarly vanish along with the Mouldy Party. Mr Silly Bow Ties misses the cut and finally does his most sensible thing of all, ie takes up the post of High Commissioner to the Ross dependency.
    The resulting four-Party Parliament delivers a National Govt where NZF abstain on confidence and supply in return for some retirement baubles for Winston.

    Also Russell Norman and Metiria Turei both have sex changes, but that’s in Episode 2.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Yogibear

    Not overly smart either way you look at it.

    Perhaps Colin believes he will always be National’s second cab off the rank, behind ACT, and therefore he needs to have a decisive victory over ACT in a contest like this, to (a) make Key take him seriously, and (b) eliminate ACT as his competitor?

    Either way it’s a bit unfortunate, as the electorates and ideologies Cons and Act represent are quite different, and there should be room for both pressure parties in a centre right govt.

    It also runs the risk of appearing as a battle between two little chihuahuas, scrapping it out for the right to sit on Key’s lap…

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. wiseowl (895 comments) says:

    Untied.
    I like it !

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. RRM (9,924 comments) says:

    Boris Piscina (29 comments) says:

    I love this guy! :lol:

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. G152 (341 comments) says:

    Just two points

    Rankins rank
    Craigs bugeyes

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. iMP (2,385 comments) says:

    This is very strategic and I agree, “cunning.”

    1. in 2011 when the Consvs were unknown, 60,000 people gave them their Party Vote. They did not appear in the polls.
    2. in 2014 they need 112,000 votes. They already have 60k because the 2011 voters will be absolute core on whom they can rely 2014.

    So, they need just 52,000 votes to breach the 5%. The Epsom focus will lift that. If its a low voter turnout nationally, it gets even easier.

    None of this of course is ever reflected in the polls. It’s the “surprise” that hits commentators on 21 Sept, like last time (Conservatives got 2.7% and Winston got over the threshold).

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. iMP (2,385 comments) says:

    And how many people gave Consvs one of their votes last year in the Local Body AKL elections? 87,000. Starting to see how this works, now?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. James Stephenson (2,180 comments) says:

    See mi in mi Benz and ting
    Drivin’ through Constant Spring
    Them check sey me come from cosmo spring
    But a true dem no know and ting
    Dem no know sey we top rankin
    Uptown Top Rankin

    With apologies to Althea & Donna

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    1. The Conservative Party appeared in nine polls leading into the last election getting up to 2.4% support.

    2. Is there any evidence that the 59,237 who voted Conservative in 2011 are “absolute core”. It’s quite possible some if not many of those voters were throwing a protest vote, strategic voting or have since been disillusioned now they have seen Craig in action over some time and the Conservatives have proven to be nowhere nears as conservative as some had hoped.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. ShawnLH (5,124 comments) says:

    “Also Russell Norman and Metiria Turei both have sex changes, but that’s in Episode 2.”

    Would anyone notice the difference?

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

    Wussell is going to have an op and become a Man?

    He can use Cun*liffes bits, he dont want them any more.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Colville (2,268 comments) says:

    iMP.
    According to your logic NZF has a core voter base of 147,000 voters because they got those last time?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Mark (1,488 comments) says:

    Agree with DPF, sound tactical ploy by the Conservatives. High focus seat. adds some interest for the media to a seat that already attracts a disproportionate share of the media attention. If ACT poll poorly the scenario painted by DPF of a switch of allegiance becomes quite possible.

    If Craig had not been so stupid as to make binding referenda a bottom line it would have become even more interesting.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. iMP (2,385 comments) says:

    Colville, NZF is different because its a known quantity and its ‘brand’ is a person, so NZF’s result depends largely on what Winston does or does not do, and how many lies he gets caught out on. But your 147,000 is not far off the mark; NZF has averaged approx 8% across the last seven elections (including one fPP) fluctuating between 4-13.36%.

    Indeed, in 2011 it’s result was 6.59% or 147,544. You are quite prescient.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Unity (584 comments) says:

    My money is on Christine Rankin. She is very politically savvy and could be a force to be reckoned with. National need someone fresh on their side and also to keep them honest, not to mention forcing them to start listening to the people instead of ignoring what we all want, as shown by numerous referenda. I like the non-negotiable binding referenda of the Conservatives. It’s time the politicians did our bidding for a change. I feel this policy will draw many in because most of us are very disillusioned with politicians and their agendas, which don’t reflect our wishes.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. iMP (2,385 comments) says:

    The overwhelming STAT for John Key in September will be.

    The Conservatives will bring in way more party votes to the C-Right than David Seymour and woeful ACT can muster. Everything else is irrelevant, Best line was Colin Craig last night on TVNews…

    “We’ll bring more volunteers to Epsom than ACT have members.” He’s probably not far off the mark.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Urban_Redneck (87 comments) says:

    In addition to binding referenda, the concept of representative recalls would assist the electorate to reclaim more stringent control over their “representatives”.

    In short, the elitist, but largely incompetent political class need a sword of Damocles hanging over them at all times.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. wreck1080 (3,917 comments) says:

    I thought it was a good move.

    Rankin is one of the good people in politics.

    John Key is showing spectacular arrogance over this seat – – almost an Aaron Gilmore level of arrogance.

    And, kiwis hate nothing more than power induced arrogance. Including epsom voters.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Ed Snack (1,873 comments) says:

    Yes, sure “interesting” and possibly even astute by Colin Craig in a tactical sense. What I still don’t get is why the enthusiasm for Colin. He’s not much different from another Winston with no real philosophical core (at least not a coherent one that I can see) and a one man band approach who will take up with anyone who might be useful along the way.

    I think i can see the appeal as someone new, but new to me should also be refreshing but the Conservatives aren’t that, at least not to me. A grab bag of old policies; I don’t think one should, for example, concentrate on the smacking issue itself, focus instead on what you could call “nanny-statism” IMHO, but of course Craig actually supports statism except for specific exceptions like smacking children. And that doesn’t give me any warm fuzzies and apart from the knee-jerk “spare the rod…” types it probably doesn’t resonate much with the general public either.

    Me, I’m a “small government” aficionado both economically and socially; I dislike social engineering and the nanny-state believing as I do that people are generally responsible and capable of managing their own lives; that is I trust people to be able to make their own decisions and don’t think that their choices should be over-restricted. I don’t see the Conservatives as having any interest in less government interference, that want more of it but they want their own “brand” of interference.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Grizz (605 comments) says:

    Sounds like Craig has abandoned ECB and is focussing all attention into Epsom. ACT vs Conservatives its game on. A political bun fight in the regions. If only it could be decided by porridge wrestling.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. iMP (2,385 comments) says:

    Does David Seymour even know what “porridge” is?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Odakyu-sen (655 comments) says:

    Media attention is good for the Conservatives.

    They need to focus on their core message as the small-government/law-and-order/one-law-rules-them-all party. Beware of xenophobia, but plead the case for traditional NZ culture. (Be the party to define that traditional Kiwi culture.)

    The good people of Epsom may not take too kindly to being dictated to about who they should vote for.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Changeiscoming (189 comments) says:

    Another great side effect of this is the fact that Colin Craig can now focus on the Party Vote. Get around the country as much as he can holding meetings and raising the party vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    (Be the party to define that traditional Kiwi culture.)

    It would be fascinating to see the Conservatives or anyone try and do that.

    The good people of Epsom may not take too kindly to being dictated to about who they should vote for.

    I haven’t seen anyone trying to dictate who anyone should vote for – and even if they tried it would be futile, we have a secret voting system and can vote for whoever we like.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. iMP (2,385 comments) says:

    Couldn’t agree more Odakyu-sen. RANKIN: “They (Epsom voters) don’t have to be told what to do. They’re not dummies.”

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Another great side effect of this is the fact that Colin Craig can now focus on the Party Vote.

    I’ve heard of floating voters but not floating candidates.

    There were suggestions Craig might stand in Upper Harbour (whoops, Paula Bennett), Rodney (whoops, Mark Mitchell) and East Coast Bays (whoops, Murray McCully). Is he giving up on that too now he hasn’t been handed the electorate by Key?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Odakyu-sen (655 comments) says:

    Pete,

    Politics is the art of creating the truth when the truth is not known. For example: “What kind of society is the best for this nation at this time?”

    The truth is out there; you just have to convince enough people that you have found it.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    Odakyu-sen, the truth is I don’t understand what you are trying to say. ‘Truth’ is an odd word to use in relation to “What kind of society is the best for this nation at this time?” which is a vague undefinable notion.

    Any country’s society is multi-faceted and there will be vastly varying idealistic views about what kind of society people may want.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. georgebolwing (854 comments) says:

    Looking at their website (http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/index.php?page=Principles), I still don’t understand what the Conservatives stand for.

    Some of these principals are pure conservative (royalist, united New Zealand, rule of law).

    Some are liberal (individual privacy, the freedom of the individual — principals which, by the way, have been used by the Courts in the US to outlaw bans on gay marriage and to decriminalize homosexuality).

    Some are socialist, at least of the fabian kind (all New Zealanders should have reasonable access to quality health care and education regardless of their ability to pay), against asset sales

    And some are just populist (the right of citizens to direct government by the democratic process including binding citizens initiated referenda).

    It’s not just that we should be able to put politicians into neat little boxes, i would like to have some idea of how they might vote on the whole range of issues likely to become before a parliament.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. deadrightkev (469 comments) says:

    Hark at Whaleoils post on Christine Rankin. Is Slater a paid National party blogger?

    How pathetic and it may come back to bite him on the arse with such an outburst but his political antennae is notoriously unreliable anyway.

    Slater must be worried by Rankin to come out swinging like that. Its good that only a handful of real voters read his blog.

    Its good to see DPF manages to maintain some degree of balance and decorum.

    All of a sudden the election campaign has got interesting. With only a 2000 majority to Act it looks like National will win Epsom in my view.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. masterman (19 comments) says:

    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy: that is the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” – John Kenneth Galbraith
    Neo-conservative: A right wing zealot born into privilege and wealth who is a most avid supporter of the “self-made man” theory.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    deadrightkev – what specifically do you disagree with from Whale Oil?

    You sound like you’ve come out swinging with no substance – are you worried about something?

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Changeiscoming (189 comments) says:

    Pete – how are United Future going? Do they still have 500 members? Have you done a blog post on the all important list that has been released.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. wiseowl (895 comments) says:

    Change
    Number 4 on the untied party list is interesting .

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Looking at Whale’s site I see that he considers that “Rankin is even less relevant than the Internet Party.”

    Less relevant – really? The daughter of a West Coast coalminer (who later became a prison officer and worked at Paremoremo), who left school with only School Certificate, didn’t go to University, got married at 20 and divorced five years later, and ended up struggling on the DPB with two young boys. She eventually got a job as a temporary clerk at the Auckland office of Social Welfare. She managed to work her way up the ladder and after nine years she became the youngest district director in the country, then progressed to the northern regional manager post for the Income Support Service. Three years later she became the general manager of Income Support. In 1998 she became the first chief executive of the Department of Work and Income.

    She’s done the hard yards and weathered a barrage of problems, including being docked a performance bonus, coming to an out-of-court settlement for a staff member who claimed constructive dismissal, being mocked for daring to be an individual and (gasp!) WEARING SHORT SKIRTS!

    She was appointed as a Families Commissioner in 2009 and attracted a lot of controversy (again) from various people including Peter Dunne, who called the appointment as “a mistake” and called on Ms Rankin to reject the position.

    My point is, having gone through all of that I’d say she’s a damn sight more relevant to the people of NZ than some of the candidates from the Internet Party, although to be fair some of their candidates look to have some degree of life experience – just not as much as Rankin. And as for Laila Harre … oh dear.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Odakyu-sen (655 comments) says:

    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy: that is the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.” – John Kenneth Galbraith

    Once you neutralize man’s nature to look after himself and his kin, you can force people to do anything “for the greater good.”

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. KevinH (1,227 comments) says:

    The most significant issue facing the Nat’s in this election including electorates such as Epsom is apathy, public interest in the election is flat. Christine Rankin may get a spike of support in Epsom but she will be forgotten in two weeks time unless the Cons can maintain some momentum. It could well be that Rankin may harden the blue vote in Epsom at the expense of Act whose vote may soften but as DPF said it will be an interesting contest in Epsom.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. ShawnLH (5,124 comments) says:

    @ masterman: August 4th, 2014 at 5:06 pm

    “Neo-conservative: A right wing zealot born into privilege and wealth who is a most avid supporter of the “self-made man” theory.”

    That is not even remotely close to an accurate definition of Neo-Conservative. Where on earth did you get that from?

    Neo-Conservatism refers to a late strain in US conservatism which, unlike more hard right forms, accepted the need for some form of welfare state, supported the civil rights movement, and who advocated a strong national defense and an assertive US foreign policy.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. publicwatchdog (2,596 comments) says:

    In terms of policies and proven track record in fighting corruption, I would not underestimate the role that will be played by Independent candidate for Epsom – Grace Haden.

    What role did former Auckland Regional Councillor Christine Rankin play in opposing the Auckland ‘Supercity’?

    Did Christine Rankin ever support the public’s (former) lawful right to a binding vote on whether or not citizens and ratepayers ever wanted this forced amalgamation of Councils in the Auckland region?

    My understanding is that the answers to those questions are NONE and NO.

    Penny Bright

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. nasska (11,525 comments) says:

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/ehemqv2tow6la5a/Cuckoo%2011.jpg

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. goldnkiwi (1,304 comments) says:

    Looks like Penny Bright is going to do a good job for Christine Rankin.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (890 comments) says:

    CG must be the worst idiot on planet next to Messiah Cunliffe.

    – Instead of being nice to National, he attacked National.

    – Instead of focussing on getting into the parliament first he started talking about bottom line demands.

    – Instead of taking an Epsom like deal, he wanted a free ride by removing Mooza from the ballot paper

    – Instead of standing by National, he indicated that he could work with the communists

    Time to perish…..

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. graham (2,335 comments) says:

    Christine Rankin has a long and proven history of standing up for herself and what she believes in, and of not being intimidated by powerful people. With her background I believe she would be ideal to achieve her stated aims of (a) providing a strong voice for Epsom, and (b) providing some much-needed BACKBONE to National.

    She has also shown herself to be genuinely interested in helping ordinary people through her varied career.

    What has Grace Haden actually achieved? You say “proven track record in fighting corruption”, where is the INDEPENDENT evidence of this?

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. wiseowl (895 comments) says:

    Penny.
    At least Christine High Rankin has been outspoken on the outrageous race based authority imposed on the people of Auckland which is a great start.

    The CP has also spoken in opposition of the anti democratic changes made to the Local Government Act over re- organisations.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Pete George (23,567 comments) says:

    graham – I agree, Christine Rankin looks like she could make a very good MP. Perhaps it’s not surprising she is being put into the Epsom spotlight. She has a very good background and offers something significantly different to Craig.

    It’s a pity she will find it difficult to get into Parliament due to our anti-democratic large party protecting threshold.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. itstricky (1,832 comments) says:

    1. (quote)Is Slater a paid National party blogger?(unquote)

    2. (quote)How pathetic and it may come back to bite him on the arse with such an outburst but his political antennae is notoriously unreliable anyway.(unquote)

    3. (quote)Its good that only a handful of real voters read his blog.(unquote)

    Glad to see someone finally has finally recognised that.

    It’s a bit of a pity I could write the same thing about his bollocks and get 60 down votes, whereas you write it about Rankin and get 6 up votes. Funny phenomenon.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. Scott Chris (6,139 comments) says:

    I’d be surprised if Rankin got more than 3% of the Epsom vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. ShawnLH (5,124 comments) says:

    She may do far better than people expect. It’s impossible to tell at this point. The really telling time will be closer to the election itself. If ACT cannot lift it’s dismal poll levels, and the CP is around 3%, and the Left closes on National, then enough Epsom voters may decide the CP is, tactically, a better option.

    It will certainly be an interesting battle.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. goldnkiwi (1,304 comments) says:

    publicwatchdog (2,115 comments) says:

    August 4th, 2014 at 6:49 pm

    Just curious about your definition of a ratepayer? Is that someone who is billed for rates or someone that pays the said rates, it would seem that the term is anomalous.

    Accordingly I imagine that your vote would be as a citizen then?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Nostalgia-NZ (5,211 comments) says:

    Some of the women from Epsom might justifiably think another woman will do far better than the previous 2 mps.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. ChardonnayGuy (1,207 comments) says:

    Excuse me, but Epsom is an urban liberal electorate. Rankin is a representative of a religious social conservative political party. Given the downfall of Richard Worth and John Banks, it may well be the case that David Seymour and Paul Goldsmith are probably the better fits for the seat than Ms Rankin. Who, incidentally, has just gotten involved with a bungle involving the (non) citizenship of five prospective Conservative Party candidates as chief executive. Hilarious. Even 7 Days couldn’t script this better…!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Unity (584 comments) says:

    Where you do get the notion that the Conservative Party is religious ChardonnayGuy? Nothing could be further from the truth. You’ve been listening to the media which for some reason are trying to paint them as nutters. I’m otherwise at a loss as to why some people seem to have a completely false idea as to what they stand for. They stand for several things that many of us have been wanting for some decades, but haven’t been able to get from the current and past Governments, and will appeal to us for this very reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. deadrightkev (469 comments) says:

    Craig will get plenty of people out and about in Epsom for Rankin. By election day the CP resources and supporters will make the difference in the end. Labour is a rubbish party but even they can make up for their hopeless policies by mobilising sign wavers.

    As much as I have a great deal of time for Jamie Whyte the campaign organisers are seat warmers who are well meaning but hopeless when it comes to fund raising and organising. Last election the brains trust should have created a new party with new people and left the old toxic Act behind. Not doing so was a big mistake.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. mikenmild (11,247 comments) says:

    You are right Unity – the Conservatives only dog whistle for the religious vote.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. deadrightkev (469 comments) says:

    “with a bungle involving the (non) citizenship of five prospective Conservative Party candidates”

    Really? Every election many parties (including National) have hopeful candidates that are permanent residents who need to get citizenship by cut-off date. That is not a bungle, it is a process. It is a bungle when they go past the cut off date and the party has not unselected them.

    That was an amateur attempt at character assassination.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. ChardonnayGuy (1,207 comments) says:

    No, Unity, I actually bother to analyse things like party donation returns (from the Electoral Commission website) and stated MP Facebook account details. Both of those demonstrate a strong fundamentalist Protestant Christian emphasis within the Conservative Party, which you can witness for yourself. Much Conservative Party advertising was handled in 2011 by Radio Rhema and Crown Publishing (a fundamentalist-owned religious imprint).

    If it’s pink, oinks and grunts, has a curly tail and tastes like bacon, then it’s probably a pig. (I apologise to pig owners who are offended by this comparison. If it’s any consolation, pigs are far more intelligent and charismatic than the average (sic) Conservative Party member/activist.)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. ChardonnayGuy (1,207 comments) says:

    And deadrightkev? Rankin is supposed to be the Conservative Party CEO. She’s supposed to attend to organisational details like that as an integral element of her job description, so, yes, legitimate question and not “character assassination.”

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. deadrightkev (469 comments) says:

    ChardGuy

    Yes, but the cut-off date remains the defining line and until that is breached there is little to throw rocks at. They clearly think these candidates are worthy of representation and are giving them the opportunity to comply by then.

    My bet is that Labour and National would do the same for candidates that they want on their list. I wonder if they also have candidates in the same position now? Maybe, but its fashionable to kick Craig and co right now.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. ChardonnayGuy (1,207 comments) says:

    Sorry, Kev, your analogy runs aground on the rock of logic. Granted, the Conservatives have a smaller party organisation than those probably at the disposal of major parties like Labour, National and the Greens, but against that, Rankin is supposed to be an experienced chief executive, formerly in charge of a New Zealand government department. She must carry the responsibility for this oversight and the embarassment that it causes her party as a result. Added to which, there’s also the question of Colin Craig’s relevant political experience compared to the more seasoned campaigners and organisational members of larger, more established political parties. If its any consolation, by the same logic, there will probably be similar pratfalls for the Mana/Internet Coalition, for the same reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. deadrightkev (469 comments) says:

    I would wager that Colin Craig surviving out of the political world to earn his living is a smarter administrator than anyone in a political party administration. But that is just that I think anyone who works for the state is below private sector standard anyway.

    As I said anything that happens before the cut-off date is folly for the purpose of political points scoring. Come back to me after the cut-off date if they are still registered as candidates and don’t have citizenship.

    I know of a candidate that has been an MP and didn’t even complete a candidates form for the party.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Changeiscoming (189 comments) says:

    ChardonnayGuy – as a person that identifies as a Christian myself. I would really like to know what a fundamentalist christian is in your mind. You used the term twice in one paragraph above and I truely do not know what the term means. You also seem to imply that christians do not lack intelligence and should not be allowed to vote or at least express their opinions in public or political arenas. Is this indeed your opinion?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote