-
Originally Posted by Aaron
No not at all well done national and Act and if you could guarantee ACT winning Epsom you could also support ACT with your party vote in the hope David Seymour can bring in a second or third MP.
I can't believe how thick the lefties in Epsom are. Surely there should be no electorate votes for Labour or the Greens candidates in Epsom. They can still give their party vote to the left but they should all be voting National for the electorate vote.
If they could get the National man voted in ACT is a goner.
That would be a bad thing. Act has consistently promoted some damn good ideas.
-
Originally Posted by Aaron
No not at all well done national and Act and if you could guarantee ACT winning Epsom you could also support ACT with your party vote in the hope David Seymour can bring in a second or third MP.
I can't believe how thick the lefties in Epsom are. Surely there should be no electorate votes for Labour or the Greens candidates in Epsom. They can still give their party vote to the left but they should all be voting National for the electorate vote.
If they could get the National man voted in ACT is a goner.
Yeah I was chuckling at how many votes D. Parker got in Epsom. But the left do not help themselves either. They could refuse to stand a candidate. Although that may not change much.... those voting Labour or Green probably still would not know to vote Goldsmith or whatever his name is.
-
Originally Posted by fungus pudding
That would be a bad thing. Act has consistently promoted some damn good ideas.
Hopefully David Seymour will be able to use his time in opposition and away from National to get more air time for those ideas.
-
Originally Posted by waikare
Yes the system is broken, all the MPs from both Greens and NZ First are all list MPs not one was elected on the night outright, and it appears they now will have a big say in how country will be run for the next three years. Is that fair,,,,,,,,,
That is just SO WRONG! Unelected party members from a minor party with only 7.5% of the nationwide party votes gets to choose the major party that forms a government.
MMP is seriously flawed, it's a farce, get rid of it.
-
Originally Posted by Baa_Baa
That is just SO WRONG! Unelected party members from a minor party with only 7.5% of the nationwide party votes gets to choose the major party that forms a government.
MMP is seriously flawed, it's a farce, get rid of it.
Even though unlikely, I sincerely hope that National gain 1 seat from the special votes. That would remove Winston's choice to the Left and force him to support National or another election called, where NZF would be wiped out.
-
Originally Posted by Rep
Hmmmm not sure about mature... noting that the third ranked party, Alternative for Germany (AfD) secured 13% of the vote and sees the return of the far-right to the Bundestag for the first time in 50 years.
This is happening all over Europe, including Scandinavia, as a result of failed immigration policies over many years.
-
Originally Posted by iceman
This is happening all over Europe, including Scandinavia, as a result of failed immigration policies over many years.
I would say the same thing here on a smaller scale...Peters is the only anti-immigration party
Last edited by Raz; 25-09-2017 at 12:37 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Baa_Baa
That is just SO WRONG! Unelected party members from a minor party with only 7.5% of the nationwide party votes gets to choose the major party that forms a government.
MMP is seriously flawed, it's a farce, get rid of it.
Not really..get an actual majority and you have no issue.
-
Originally Posted by Raz
Not really..get an actual majority and you have no issue.
That would just be FPP in disguise, so no need for MMP aye.
-
Originally Posted by Beagle
Can I throw in a curved ball here for debate. Would a N.Z. Frist / Labour / Greens coalition have the moral authority to govern ? Nearly 50% of the population didn't vote for any of those parties. I think if we end up getting this sort of coalition then MMP is a farce. Surely the party with the biggest share of the vote should have the preemptive right to form a government ?
But over 50% did. Under FPP, a party could have had well under 50% support yet have a very comfortable majority of seats. Was that fair for the majority of voters who did not vote for that party?
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks