PDA

View Full Version : New Government tomorrow????



kerryg
30th September 2005, 16:48
Results of 200,000-odd special votes are probably gunna be known tomorrow.
Seems to be a lot of different possible outcomes.

Here's my bet: the special votes will closely mirror the votes already counted on election day, so we will still have a Labour Government BUT it will likely collapse within a short period and we will have a new election ion 2006. The reasons: Maori party is needed to give Labour workable numbers but the divide between them is too deep (e.g. Foreshore and Seabed) and you have hotheads like Harawira. Also Philip Field could well be out on his arse, forcing a by-election...


Anybody?

Postie
30th September 2005, 16:50
I say we shoot all the politicians and start our own KB Party

jrandom
30th September 2005, 16:51
hrmm?

narh.

greens will get another seat out of the write-in potheads, labour will get a guaranteed abstention from NZF and we'll have the pinko minority gummint of the maniacally-frothing left that we've all been dreaming about.

winston won't go back on his word after agreeing not to scupper confidence motions, because he knows that any move of that sort would likely erode his now-all-important party vote below the threshold next time round as voters respond with more than the usual level of disgust.

jrandom
30th September 2005, 16:52
start our own KB Party

yeah but every time we do that everyone ends up pissed and doing burnouts in the driveway, and the only private members bills involved tend to be of the sort unsuitable for family viewing.

kerryg
30th September 2005, 16:57
private members unsuitable for family viewing.


Indubitably

Phurrball
30th September 2005, 16:58
*snip* the only private members bills involved tend to be of the sort unsuitable for family viewing.

:rofl: Oh the hilarity of a KB party in gubbermint...

There have been some 'interesting' pieces of legislation concerning particular members in the last term - the 'Harry Dynhoven' (sp??) bill and subsequent enactment for one...

Imagine the legislation considered in the house by a KB led parliament...

*Phurrball muses, staring into space, then sees the time and buggers off to an Equity tutorial...*

kerryg
30th September 2005, 16:59
greens will get another seat out of the write-in potheads, labour will get a guaranteed abstention from NZF and we'll have the pinko minority gummint of the maniacally-frothing left that we've all been dreaming about.




I both admire and fear you, Fish.....

ManDownUnder
30th September 2005, 17:07
Take power from the masses and give it to the few

Give SOMEONE a clear mandate to lead and have them run the place with a simple majority

*ding* NEXT!

Ixion
30th September 2005, 17:10
Take power from the masses and give it to the few

Give SOMEONE a clear mandate to lead and have them run the place with a simple majority

*ding* NEXT!


ME!

Give the People's Proletarian Democratic Liberation party (party platform: " Free bikes for all" ) a mandate and just watch us run the place. (Memo to self : First thing to do : get rid of that silly majority stuff)

Motu
30th September 2005, 17:17
Results of 200,000-odd special votes are probably gunna be known tomorrow.
Seems to be a lot of different possible outcomes.

Here's my bet: the special votes will closely mirror the votes already counted on election day, so we will still have a Labour Government BUT it will likely collapse within a short period and we will have a new election ion 2006. The reasons: Maori party is needed to give Labour workable numbers but the divide between them is too deep (e.g. Foreshore and Seabed) and you have hotheads like Harawira. Also Philip Field could well be out on his arse, forcing a by-election...


Anybody?

Labour will hold their majority....Don ''trust me,I know what I'm doing'' Brash will pack up his toys and go away because he didn't get it all his own way.....the Labour coalition will colapse and National will go in on the re election,but are inexperiance and left holding the bag on a world economy downturn - Labour are back in for the next election.

jrandom
30th September 2005, 17:18
Give SOMEONE a clear mandate to lead

why?

what's so great about that idea?

the business of government is to encourage stability, not to implement good ideas. good ideas always have unforeseen ramifications. unilateral mandates lead to things being done before the fullness of time. when the time is not ripe. and often, funnily enough, in the interests of minority pressure groups.

you may perceive our proportional representation system as a limp-wristed shackle on the energetic limb of governance, but it is more accurate to see it as an effective dampener for the schizophrenic twitching of an uncoordinated and gangrenous appendage.

the less the politicians manage to do, the better. almost anything they think of is bound to destabilise and bugger up SOMETHING.

Hitcher
30th September 2005, 17:29
BDOTGNZA hereby concedes its chances of either governing or holding the balance of power after the special votes are counted. From henceforth its political ambitions will be better served by Fish's Groaning Metaphor and Worn Cliche Party. Vote for change. Give your part vote to GMWC!

Phurrball
30th September 2005, 18:16
Take power from the masses and give it to the few

Give SOMEONE a clear mandate to lead and have them run the place with a simple majority

*ding* NEXT!

FYI should you not have seen it already: David Slack's <a href="http://publicaddress.net/default,2551.sm#post2551">numbers</a> WRT percentages of vote required to govern in previous NZ elections.

The only difference now is proportional representation...my the fun it makes...

TwoSeven
30th September 2005, 19:10
Has anyone noticed that the country seems to run better when no-one is in govt ?

riffer
30th September 2005, 19:15
... the business of government is to encourage stability, not to implement good ideas. good ideas always have unforeseen ramifications. unilateral mandates lead to things being done before the fullness of time. when the time is not ripe. and often, funnily enough, in the interests of minority pressure groups... the less the politicians manage to do, the better. almost anything they think of is bound to destabilise and bugger up SOMETHING.

Bugger me Fish, what an intelligent and sensible post.

Are you feeling allright? :dodge:

jrandom
30th September 2005, 20:01
Give your part vote to GMWC!

bah.

we settle for nothing less than whole votes, thank you very much.

jrandom
30th September 2005, 20:04
Has anyone noticed that the country seems to run better when no-one is in govt ?

no-one in govt?

oh, but they are.

they are.

what I think you mean is, "Has anyone noticed that the country seems to run better when there are no politicians interfering with the business of government?"

democracy, eh.

rule by the incompetent, appointed by the unqualified.

still, as Churchill said, it's eight times better than anything else...

cowpoos
30th September 2005, 20:16
maybe we could find a good government on ebay???? :beer:

jrandom
30th September 2005, 20:18
maybe we could find a good government on ebay????

well, your unlikely to have much success on either the US or UK sites...

SixPackBack
30th September 2005, 20:24
Pick you as a Helen Clark voter Ms Fish, much like yourself she has a small penis! :niceone:

jrandom
30th September 2005, 20:26
Pick you as a Helen Clark voter Ms Fish, much like yourself she has a small penis!

why r u obsessed with my genitalia? :mellow:

cowpoos
30th September 2005, 20:29
well, your unlikely to have much success on either the US or UK sites...


The wit is good

SixPackBack
30th September 2005, 20:40
why r u obsessed with my genitalia? :mellow:

You are a man!

jrandom
30th September 2005, 20:47
You are a man!

and that idea makes you obsess about my genitalia?

eww.

there are, you know, bars and clubs and stuff that you can go to to find other people with the same urges, dude.

SixPackBack
30th September 2005, 20:51
and that idea makes you obsess about my genitalia?

eww.

there are, you know, bars and clubs and stuff that you can go to to find other people with the same urges, dude.

You claim to be a women and the entire site knows you are a man......dude.
You have been outed, and unlike yourself a good poportion of jaffa riders have not only met me but the MILF i live with.

Keystone19
30th September 2005, 20:57
You claim to be a women and the entire site knows you are a man......dude.
You have been outed, and unlike yourself a good poportion of jaffa riders have not only met me but the MILF i live with.

I think you are being a little unkind to Ms Fish. I have not seen any evidence to suggest that she is anything other than what she claims to be, an articulate, highly educated lady with political tendencies in the correct direction...

cowpoos
30th September 2005, 20:59
unlike yourself a good poportion of jaffa riders have not only met me but the MILF i live with.


WTF...and why...who cares....and what are you talking about....

so your moms hot and you'ld like to fuck her....thats dodgy man...

SixPackBack
30th September 2005, 21:03
WTF...and why...who cares....and what are you talking about....

so your moms hot and you'ld like to fuck her....thats dodgy man...


Idiot, my wife*back on subject*.......cowpoos is Fish a man?

cowpoos
30th September 2005, 21:24
Idiot, my wife*back on subject*.......cowpoos is Fish a man?


ask her?...I dunno?

Hitcher
30th September 2005, 21:32
I am amused by the apparent desires of some to quantify the sexuality of somebody before they can engage in a debate with them. Sigmund Freud probably had a word for that...

Ixion
30th September 2005, 21:43
D'you know that some types of fish are hermaphrodites? And that there are two types of hermaphroditism - one where the individual has both male and female organs; and the other where the individual changes back and forth from one to the other gender (with appropriate changes of genitalia). And there are fish of both types. Makes Mr SixpackBack's question a bit tricky I think. Oh, and even male fish don't have penises

Jamezo
30th September 2005, 21:46
I am amused by the apparent desires of some to quantify the sexuality of somebody before they can engage in a debate with them. Sigmund Freud probably had a word for that...

promiscuity? Or did you in fact mean "qualify the sexuality of"? Because the whole notion of trying to quantify one's sexuality is fraught with innuendo.


I caught teh grammar po-lice out lol

SixPackBack
30th September 2005, 21:49
D'you know that some types of fish are hermaphrodites? And that there are two types of hermaphroditism - one where the individual has both male and female organs; and the other where the individual changes back and forth from one to the other gender (with appropriate changes of genitalia). And there are fish of both types. Makes Mr SixpackBack's question a bit tricky I think. Oh, and even male fish don't have penises

So the possibilty that Ms Fish is a hermaphrodite has been raised.......so by saying go fuck yourself should gain a positive response?

oldrider
30th September 2005, 21:57
My intuition tells me that Fish is not all he portrays! But :whocares: