Thread: Some useful statistics from Nicole McKee

Originally Posted by 7mm Rem Mag

Was all set to vote for ACT but after recent events I wouldn't give him the steam off my piss

As somebody that avoids news to keep sanity, what recent events?

You seem to be forgetting its all about votes. We should have learnt buy now that come election time all of them are gunna do all these wonderful things for us then once they have your vote you can piss off for 3 years sucker, time and time again. Vote on their track record not what they are gunna do for you....

Stay the course fellahs.

Originally Posted by STC

As somebody that avoids news to keep sanity, what recent events?

He sacked half of his collegues for having an opinion, not a good start going forward and as stated above already talking about not repelling the regestration.

What else are you voting him in for? Putting the retirement age up to 67? Or something else?

I seem to remember everyone going on about voting NZ first a few years back because they were for the firearms licience holders and how did that end up?

National are Labour in a blue shirt. Nothing will change , the words will be differant but the intent will be the same . The WEF rules either party leadership , and whoever wins will tow the line accordingly.

The world we knew pre-6 years ago is a distant memory and is not coming back.

Originally Posted by winchesterM69A

National are Labour in a blue shirt. Nothing will change , the words will be differant but the intent will be the same . The WEF rules either party leadership , and whoever wins will tow the line accordingly.

The world we knew pre-6 years ago is a distant memory and is not coming back.

Slow learner?

Not wanting to get political, just explain the system:

No matter who you vote for its important to understand how "The System" works.

One peculiarity of our system is that, even if a shitload of people abstain from voting, or a shitload of voters vote for a myriad of small or tiny parties, we ALWAYS end up with 120 seats filled in the house.

How can that be? with the 2020 event there were 8% of voters who went with small parties that didn't make the 5% threshold. So that's 8% of votes that went up in a puff of smoke, as those 8% didn't get even one seat. 8% should equate to 9.8 seats.

So instead of votes counting towards seats in Parliament, the votes end up being turned into percentages, so they ALWAYS fill the 120 seats, despite 18% of eligible voters not voting, and 8% of voters voting for a party that did not make the 5% threshold.

So every vote doesn't count. Otherwise there would be 26% of Parliament empty, cause 26% of eligible voters didn't vote for those bums in those seats.

Yeah, three small outfits won an electorate seat, but that doesn't skew what I have explained too much, rough as it is.

So it pays to understand the system.

Originally Posted by XR500

Not wanting to get political, just explain the system:

No matter who you vote for its important to understand how "The System" works.

One peculiarity of our system is that, even if a shitload of people abstain from voting, or a shitload of voters vote for a myriad of small or tiny parties, we ALWAYS end up with 120 seats filled in the house.

How can that be? with the 2020 event there were 8% of voters who went with small parties that didn't make the 5% threshold. So that's 8% of votes that went up in a puff of smoke, as those 8% didn't get even one seat. 8% should equate to 9.8 seats.

So instead of votes counting towards seats in Parliament, the votes end up being turned into percentages, so they ALWAYS fill the 120 seats, despite 18% of eligible voters not voting, and 8% of voters voting for a party that did not make the 5% threshold.

So every vote doesn't count. Otherwise there would be 26% of Parliament empty, cause 26% of eligible voters didn't vote for those bums in those seats.

Yeah, three small outfits won an electorate seat, but that doesn't skew what I have explained too much, rough as it is.

So it pays to understand the system.

So you should vote for the likely largest party who will make the likely biggest difference? And not give your single issue vote to a likely small or not represented party?

Originally Posted by 7mm Rem Mag

He sacked half of his collegues for having an opinion, not a good start going forward and as stated above already talking about not repelling the regestration.

What else are you voting him in for? Putting the retirement age up to 67? Or something else?

I seem to remember everyone going on about voting NZ first a few years back because they were for the firearms licience holders and how did that end up?

Well to be fair, he didn't sack all of them. One resigned (he chose to accept that resignation which to be fair was probably the best outcome), another went off in a mental tailspin involving a complete brain fart. I dunno - I think blaming Seymour for those sorts of personality failures is a bit hard as everyone can look normal and pass a screening up to the time the pressure comes on. It's a good example of why politicians and regulators shouldn't get too lyrical about the numbers of firearms licence holders that can't comply with the basic duties as by and large firearms licence holders are the least-represented group of Kiwi's on the naughty list.

also to be fair when comments along the lines of what was shown.....he had to do "something" or be seen to sponser borderline nutters.
he still will get my vote..... as long as they get some decent numbers in seats,they CAN make a difference....they CAN moderate or tweak the policies of thier partner...... SOME influence sure as shit beats NO influence...and that my friends is our two choices. ITS THAT SIMPLE.

Originally Posted by Tahr

So you should vote for the likely largest party who will make the likely biggest difference? And not give your single issue vote to a likely small or not represented party?

That's my take on it.

But it makes it hard on budding parties trying to get over the start line...

Originally Posted by Tahr

So you should vote for the likely largest party who will make the likely biggest difference? And not give your single issue vote to a likely small or not represented party?

Yeah - that's about it.
Labour and National will always attract the larger vote numbers.
If you think the main party you are 'inline' with is not totally on board with your 'hopes and aspirations' for a decent future, you vote in a 'conscience' to pull them in line ...... ie, ACT or Greens.
Act will not go with Labour .......... and Greens will not go with National.
Winston (NZ First) will go where the 'baubles' are - regardless of what he says, and that's a shame - because he sees things how they are.

You're throwing away your vote on the others .......... but we all have the 'right' do do that.

And I read somewhere - and it's true, that if a Law is put in place - a change in government very, very seldom repeals it, and that's been shown time and time again. It will have to prove itself a 'dumb and expensive idea' before it gets booted.

Removing laws put in place by other parties when they are in government hasn't been that common an event - as the party has to replace it with something.

My theory of picking the political party I'm going to vote for is look for the policy promises I absolutely don't agree with and which obviously won't work first - that culls the pool of prospective vote-getters right down for me straight off. Then I look at the policies I just don't like as no advantage for me, and generally these line up with the parties that have a history of doing things that do not improve my personal situation at all. After that, if there's any parties left I generally can start looking at the policies I like the most haha - usually this is a ridiculously short list.

I think we need to remember this country is our home, there needs to be things in place that nourish us - our outdoors, our liberties, care for our health and beliefs, education, chosen way of life and so on.

There are those who will put a monetary value on those things and will sell what we take for granted, or will give it away. The liberties we take for granted will be limited, or removed - we are seeing that now.
We are a 'humanitarian' nation, we take in those who have been evicted from their own homes - and in doing so we are diluting our customary values as we conscientiously adopt or make way for theirs.
We also take in those who have money - we need their money to help our economy.
One day it will not be our country - it will be theirs.
We are not alone, that is happening across the world - we watch it on the television every day. The NZ our youth is growing up in is not the NZ I grew up in - our youth will never know the 'freedoms' I experienced - they are gone.
Taxing the wealthy will change fuck all, but educating the stupid might help.

We have lost the 'greater picture' in our pursuit of 'want' and greed - we want what everyone else has ......... and we are 'promised'.
Every election we are 'promised' - and I see the things I took for granted diminished or gone - because it had a value to someone.
And lately - it was to make a 'statement' to the world.

Our 'world future' doesn't look particularly promising - China wants Taiwan, Russia wants Ukraine and the whole of Europe is affected, and not in a good way. Our biggest trading partner is our biggest threat and we are making our troops 'combat ready'.

I'm bored now .....................

sounds bad but making our troops combat ready for what? what's going to happen? Our cops have been getting pointers on aggressive enforcement what's up with that? Is there a country In the world we could take on and defeat?

might find out where our ars went