If National wins ...

[iceman]

Only two things for it- get Aunty Helen back from saving the world or convince Jacinda her time has come.

I think the Labour Party as we knew it yesteryear is finished. Unless some miraculous new leadership contender appears I think the Party will split. It is becoming painstaikingly obvious that the dreamed of " broad church " factions have nothing in common. Whether either Cunliffe or Robertson are chosen it is a lost cause !

[artemis]

I think the Labour Party as we knew it yesteryear is finished. Unless some miraculous new leadership contender appears I think the Party will split. It is becoming painstaikingly obvious that the dreamed of " broad church " factions have nothing in common. Whether either Cunliffe or Robertson are chosen it is a lost cause !

Perhaps the far left and rainbow groups in Labour could hook up (OK bad choice of words) with the Greens and have 3 or 4 co-leaders. What fun, but seriously could work as they are not too far apart. The rest of Labour - maybe NZ First? Which is going to struggle once Mr Peters retires, or loses the plot.

[winner69]

You going to be part of this group EZ
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11332997

Might be better if they let outsiders tell them everything that went wrong.

[elZorro]

You going to be part of this group EZ
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11332997

Might be better if they let outsiders tell them everything that went wrong.

W69, interesting list of processes to go through, first I'd seen all that. There wouldn't be many businesses that would do that much strategy work on the budget that Labour has. Of course, a lot of the inputs will be provided free of charge by party stalwarts. I will be putting my 2c worth in, most of which I've mentioned on this thread already. I have the ear of someone who helps formulate Labour policy in one area. I note that they are going to look at their campaign slogan, "Vote Positive" along with their targeting approach, also how they did with the media. Maybe in all those areas they could have done better.

I see that Twitter, used by many Young Labour people in this campaign, seems to be leftie disposed, and may have given Labour more cause for hope than they deserved. It could be that people who tweet are more informed (and younger) than the general voter, that would be my hope.

No-one seems to have mentioned that in tandem with the three-terms in, three terms out periodical purging of main teams, National has used Crosby/Textor since 2004. By the last term of Helen Clark's government, they only just held out National. Now the boot is on the other foot, National look to have a stranglehold on the front benches. They now have control of the media, the blogs, some of the polls, and accordingly, the minds of the NZ voter.

This explains the great sadness around the Labour and Greens camp: the country has handed National a mandate for RMA and labour reforms, and we all know which way that's heading. Middle and struggle-street NZ will suffer for this, of that we are sure. Maybe it'll make NZ a more competitive place, but most of us will never see the benefits of that. Any super-profits will be locked out of our reach.

W69, if we now ask voters where we went wrong, we will hear back through the strongly polarized C/T filter, that we didn't connect. Despite the fact that we tried to run a clean election, that the three main words we were to use were Family, Jobs, and Homes. How much more direct could we be? Why did lower and middle NZ fail to see that an immediate increase in the minimum wage would help them? Or that 10,000 affordable houses a year would take thousands of apprentices into training? That a move to smart businesses instead of sinking lids would help wider employment?

I'll tell you why, because C/T had some basic responses for John Key's Team, the messages were restrictive, they were not allowed off message (look at how stupid Bill English looked, when he obeyed those instructions on TV) and yet NZ believed these words, plus the bloggers and the press (looking after their advertisers, most of whom vote National) chimed in as well.

Now we have bitter Labour ex-candidates fronting on TV, poking more borax at the party, and Farrar sitting alongside hardly able to contain himself (The Nation). Because he knows that the more Labour fights within itself and doesn't spot the C/T elephant and the attendant nasty bloggers, the longer it will be before Labour gets back onto the front benches.

If we did have a march on parliament, one of the phrases for a sign might be: "Don't tell us how to think".

[Vaygor1]

You going to be part of this group EZ
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11332997

Might be better if they let outsiders tell them everything that went wrong.

I note in the Herald article (Winner's link) that Labour's terms of reference for review of the 2014 election campaign doesn't directly address the constitution by way of how a Labour leader is selected.

The Herald article does loosely state that the reviewers have also been asked to look at the implications for its recommendations on party governance (amongst other things), so this issue might hopefully come out in the wash.

After their 2002 election disaster, National toyed briefly with the idea of allowing its membership to elect its leader (at least in part), but this idea was quickly rejected, and for good reason I think. For Labour, this leader-selection process also extends to the unions too.

And this is the setup that handed Cunliffe the leadership a year ago, and he is trying to use it again.

The fact that Cunliffe is able to even have a crack at getting back in through this method proves to me that the existing process is fatally flawed.

As such, the whole leader-selection setup including the split in power between caucus, members, and unions needs a very hard look, and so should be a clear element within the terms of reference for the 2014 election campaign review.

[nextbigthing]

Might be better if they let outsiders tell them everything that went wrong.

But they don't want to listen Winner. See it was Kim DCs fault for stealing all the airtime so the perfect policy couldn't get through. It was Hagers fault for releasing a dirty book about the right when the campaign message was supposed to be vote positive. And it was the NZ's public's fault for being too stupid to understand that mandating who gets a job based on what anatomy they have really is the best way forward. Stupid Kiwis. When will they learn that Labour knows what's best for them. Yeah we Labour folk did nothing wrong!
But it's all good because we'll have a contest between the man who returned the second worst result for us ever and another guy who represents a minority and his debatably good looking side kick called Jacinta who I think is on work experience from seventh form at high school. That will sort us out, we'll really sock it to JK this time, from all three sides of our warring caucus!

[nextbigthing]

el Z, there must be a left wing equivalent of Crosby Text or? Why not suggest to the powers that Labour employ them to do the same thing for Labour?

[Sgt Pepper]

I think the Labour Party as we knew it yesteryear is finished. Unless some miraculous new leadership contender appears I think the Party will split. It is becoming painstaikingly obvious that the dreamed of " broad church " factions have nothing in common. Whether either Cunliffe or Robertson are chosen it is a lost cause !

I think youve got to be cautious though, dont forget UK Labour under Tony Blair delivered the Conservatives their biggest defeat since 1832. Yet they came back to power. Adverse economic conditions, misguided policies and leadership changes can all turn a public very sour on a ruling party

[winner69]

EZ, hope they aren't going to get Mike Williams more involved?

[elZorro]

el Z, there must be a left wing equivalent of Crosby Text or? Why not suggest to the powers that Labour employ them to do the same thing for Labour?

I don't know for sure, but maybe Labour uses Rob Salmond. Here's a reference to them from Chris Trotter, while explaining why Labour didn't feel they could align themselves with the Greens. Probably only because C/T got there first, and had modified public perception against it.

http://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/11...om-the-greens/

The Polity blog (Salmond's company) , some very good techo/indepth data on the campaign, and voting behaviour.

http://polity.co.nz/blog/1