I watched it. I kept an eye on the worm. I tried not to cheer when the little wriggling thing began to purr at Phil Goff. I tried not to cheer when Goff kept his older-brother thing going and patiently explained to his little bro Johny where he had gone wrong.
It was a very good debate for Labour and its leader. Key and National, not so much.
It may not change the result of the election but that debate will have made lefties across the country, at least those who watched it, very happy indeed.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
65 "undecided" "left wing" voters still unable to get the worm to move more than a wee bit.
Seems the only consistent move came with the mention of Winston Peters - down.
A crappy piece of useless gerrymandering by the equally useless TV3. Fail
You've been reading the fizzy nonsense at Kiwiblog, Fred, where rather than talk about how well Phil Goff came across on the bulk of the debate, Farrar myopically and predictably chose to whine about the worm!
I too think the worm is a waste of time, but I was still bale to see how Key took a drubbing from Goff on most issues and was only able to make progress when talking about Winston Peters. Good grief!
The debate itself was a very good one, well moderated and offering a chance to both leaders to express themselves. Goff make a great job of it while Key was quite weak and defensive, in my view. In the previous debate, key was stronger than last night. He looked a bit bamboozled by Goff's authoritative delivery and mien.
able - bale(ful) describes Key's performance :-)
How the hell can you think Phil Goof can lead this country Robert? half his own party hate him and he has spent his entire political career jumping around the heals of other Labour party leaders.
The guy is about as interesting as a rusty old filing cabinet.
Labour are finished in their current form, it's over, Clark has gone and it would seem the consolidation of her own leadership eliminated any potential future leaders from the mix.
They are in exactly the same position that National was after 99, any talk of them leading now is simply slowing down the inevitable collapse and rebuild.
Policy Sharunda, policy.
For a man so 'popular' as Key it's very telling that this is a close election down a left/right split that he is relying on the debacle of ACT and scaremongering about coalitions.
As many people are strongly opposed to this man's worldview as those that are blinded by his shallow celebrity.
"Goof", Shunda? A little reactive there, aren't you?
You've condemed the man and won't see value in what he's now saying, so I'll not try to promote him or his statemenmts, nor will I try to praise his policies, as Anonymous has done, as your ears are glued.
I watched both men last night and tried to be objective, as despite my ragging of Key, I am able, I believe, to look reasonably objectively at individual performances. Remembering too, that I'm not a Labour supporter and don't laud them out of ideological devotion.
Goff could lead the country, in my view. He's not stupid and nor are his team. There have been significant changes made by them in their approach to our shared welfare and many of those are superior to Key's and National's by a country mile. Mind you, I'd prefer to see the Greens at the helm :-)
As many people are strongly opposed to this man's worldview as those that are blinded by his shallow celebrity.
You really don't see the absurdity of that statement do you.
Goodness gracious me.
What I find quite remarkable Robert is that you rebuke me for my attitude towards fellow Kiwi's for leaving NZ, yet you and a few others here are happy to judge more than half our population as ignorant, blind, and perhaps even psychologically disturbed for not voting for a Labour led government.
Shurnando,
The statement is not absurd.
The interpretation of the statement may be absurd.
But that is just semantics.
"I refute only things that have evidence to support them and reports I have not bothered to read, or that I have read but decided to disagree with." (Guess who?)
Thank you.
" you and a few others here are happy to judge more than half our population as ignorant, blind, and perhaps even psychologically disturbed for not voting for a Labour led government."
Oh yes? Paste me one example that fits that charge, Shunda and I'll fall on my sword :-)
Shurnando,
The statement is not absurd.
It is not only absurd, it is unenlightened, ignorant, and just plain illogical.
You still don't understand why?.
Good for you 'annondo'.
Shunda - I don't see the absurdity either. Would you explain it to me/us?
(My take is: x-number of people are strongly opposed.Y-number are blinded by Key's celebrity-ness. x is equal to y.)
It seems entirely possible. Surely you aren't thinking that all those who favour key are blinded by his celebrity?
Most are blinded by greed and self interest, or a pathological hatred of Helen Clark :-)
As many people are strongly opposed to this man's world-view as those that are blinded by his shallow celebrity.
I thought the Greens were the ones keen on "shallow celebrity", hell, they even hired some tacky actors didn't they??
Shunda - your last comment in no way addresses the questions put to you. Are you simply dodging and weaving for your own amusement?
Taught by the best Mr Guyton!;)
You're mis-applying your learning, Shunda. Such methods are for visits to sites where you deeply disagree with the claims there and wish to shatter the status quo thinking in order to supplant a better idea. I can't see hide nor hair of your better idea.
Post a Comment