|
Are you a This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| homeowner |
|
39 | 22.41% |
| renter |
|
69 | 39.66% |
| stupid peace of poo poo |
|
66 | 37.93% |
| Total: | 174 votes | ||
|
The second article on stuff atm is one trying to put a positive spin on it for National: http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/opinion/78260422/Flag-vote-defeated-but-not-humiliated?cid=app-android
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 10:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
Funny thing John probably would have gotten the flag changed as his legacy project if the whole selection process wasn't a farcical cock-up designed to pick his personal choice of a terrible silver fern
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 10:26
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:Except in the instances where the GG doesn't do what Parliament says and overrides our self governance. When has this happened? I'm not saying it hasn't but I've never heard of it. e: http://www.parliament.nz/en-nz/about-parliament/how-parliament-works/ppnz/00HOOOCPPNZ_281/chapter-28-enactment-and-publication-of-acts posted:No bill presented to a Governor or a Governor-General has ever been refused the Royal assent in New Zealand, although two Acts were subsequently disallowed by the Sovereign (in 1855 and 1867) under a procedure which no longer exists. Has the GG overridden our self-governance in some other way then? Wafflecopper fucked around with this message at 10:57 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 10:51
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:When has this happened? I'm not saying it hasn't but I've never heard of it. Probably talking about the time the CIA and MI6 collaborated with Aus GG John Kerr, to oust Whitlam
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 11:01
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:When has this happened? I'm not saying it hasn't but I've never heard of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 11:44
|
|
|
Ghostlight posted:I wasn't intending to say it has happened, just that the argument that it won't happen based on it not having already happened here is idiotic. Regardless of the ramifications of doing it, the Governor General can do it, and for a lot of republicans that's a good enough reason to get rid of what is a nepotistic legacy position whose only defense for retaining it is "well, they're supposed to only perform a ceremonial role, and if they don't we'll just have a constitutional crisis no big". Your post that I quoted sure made it sound like you were saying it had happened, but anyway: I never said it won't happen, but it is extremely unlikely to ever happen and as such to say we're only "nominally" self-governing is ridiculous. The GG would never refuse assent or dissolve Parliament except in extreme circumstances and for all intents and purposes we do in fact govern ourselves. Our government is made of up New Zealanders and elected by New Zealanders. It makes the laws and the Queen stays out of it. The GG, although officially the Queen's representative, is also a New Zealander. When Australian GG John Kerr dismissed PM Whitlam, it was only after consultation with Australian Chief Justice Garfield Barwick and not actually on advice of the Queen. Can you really imagine the British Crown deciding to get involved in New Zealand's domestic politics and instructing the GG to interfere? I never made the argument it won't happen because it hasn't happened so far, my argument is that we do in fact govern ourselves and any interference by the GG is only likely in exceptional circumstances and even then it would almost certainly be on advice of the New Zealand courts and not a result of British meddling. e: Not a monarchist btw, I'm all for a republic Wafflecopper fucked around with this message at 12:42 on Mar 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 12:37
|
|
|
I didn't vote FOR the current flag, I voted AGAINST the proposed new flag. I bet a lot of votes were like that. The reporting and even jk's "people voted for the current flag" stance is irritating.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 12:47
|
|
|
 That's some good headlining there NZHerald. klen dool posted:I didn't vote FOR the current flag, I voted AGAINST the proposed new flag. I bet a lot of votes were like that. The reporting and even jk's "people voted for the current flag" stance is irritating. And yeah this. I thought the new flag would have looked good on fire
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
damocles, why are you worried about that sword? it hasn't fallen yet
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 12:59
|
|
|
I came here looking for butthurt from change voters
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Try Facebook and/or stuff comments?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
mirthdefect posted:Try Facebook and/or stuff comments? Yes- I was hoping people had curated some they have seen and post them here. So far Ive just read one person talk about "You know, at the next olympics, the REAL symbol of our country most of our athletes will be wearing" yes the silver fern the one they have been using for decades now
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
Jacobin posted:Yes- I was hoping people had curated some they have seen and post them here. Yes, but that silver fern will likely be part of a real design, and not awkwardly shoe horned into a flag. Because it's a logo, and flags aren't logos.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
There are some great comments out there today, especially on the Young Nats and the Chang the Flag pages. Everything boils down to: "We had a chance to change and you blew it!" "You're all stupid idiots!" "This shows how immature this country is - grow up!" "People only voted against it to spite John Key" "We get mistaken for Australia EVERY DAY" "You'll never get another chance at this, so you should have voted for change regardless" and my favourite "If you take out the people that voted against it because of John Key the new flag would have won"
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
If they'd just used the rugby flag instead of that awful modern design they could have had change.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
open24hours posted:If they'd just used the rugby flag instead of that awful modern design they could have had change. It's not even modern, it's just corporate. It's for corporate, maybe a little bit of trend. I'm pretty sure New Zealand is a more even distribution between the stoner and true doom murderhead demographics.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
It's just a dogshit fern
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Couldn't we just adopt the UN flag so Key can't weasel out of our international commitments? And think of the Tourism!
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
WarpedNaba posted:Couldn't we just adopt the UN flag so Key can't weasel out of our international commitments? And think of the Tourism! Aunty Helen had her turn you loving communist
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
"People only voted against it to spite John Key" This is true but as bonus effect for voting NO. poo poo flag, wrong reasons.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
John Key politicised the flag vote and people are mad people voted against an unrepentant sexual abuser because they hate him? Weird.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 04:20
|
|
|
Considering how much he involved himself in the process, what was he expecting would happen? The idea that people only voted to keep the flag to spite Key is also stupid. Sure, a fair few probably did a "gently caress you" vote, but then again, the alternate design was loving garbage as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
It's one of those excuses that people will use so they don't have to accept that maybe other people had a different opinion on something they themsleves liked. "Oh people voted against it because of John Key, not because it's a ghastly piece of poo poo." Just like when your school friends liked someone famous or something they had that you didn't, they'd say you were just jealous, so they didn't have to deal with a differing opinion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
BARONS CYBER SKULL posted:John Key politicised the flag vote and people are mad people voted against an unrepentant sexual abuser because they hate him? Exactly. He positioned the choice as "the flag that represents New Zealand" vs "the flag that represents John Key". Can't complain that people spite-voted, when he was expecting them to vote for his choice out of love and admiration for his dumb rear end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
Hmmm looking through the main articles on both Stuff and The Herald, neither have anything on the referendum anymore. Pretty quick to sweep that one under the rug. Even this morning the headline article on stuff was about a cafe serving cheap coffee.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 08:10
|
|
|
Hopefully the baristas are still putting the fern on the coffee.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 08:54
|
|
|
Guardian has a decent article on it, actually http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/25/new-zealand-referendum-same-flag-what-was-that-about
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 08:56
|
|
|
 This is maybe the most annoying thing
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 10:34
|
|
|
klen dool posted:I didn't vote FOR the current flag, I voted AGAINST the proposed new flag. I bet a lot of votes were like that. The reporting and even jk's "people voted for the current flag" stance is irritating. This. It really annoys me seeing all those people (even JK's tweet on the last page) who are saying "Now a flag's been decided we've gotta stick with it!!!!" and be happy about it, because we've had our say or whatever. I ended up voting for the lesser of two evils but that did absolutely not mean that I am happy with our current flag or happy to keep the status quo. I don't feel like I got a chance to have my say at all. And yeah, after all that we have no idea how many people are actually interested in changing the flag because both of those referendums told us poo poo-all. I guess if the amount of people who voted for the alternative flag was that high then there must have been enough people among them who wanted to change it despite the terrible design, so if you add to that the people who voted for the old flag despite wanting to change then there were probably actually enough people to vote in a new flag if we actually got a good design.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 12:21
|
|
|
Wafflecopper posted:Can you really imagine the British Crown deciding to get involved in New Zealand's domestic politics and instructing the GG to interfere? I never made the argument it won't happen because it hasn't happened so far, my argument is that we do in fact govern ourselves and any interference by the GG is only likely in exceptional circumstances and even then it would almost certainly be on advice of the New Zealand courts and not a result of British meddling. FWIW, it wouldn't be the British Crown interfering. The NZ Monarchy, while having it's roots in the British Crown, is a somewhat separate but shared institution. The Queen, like John Key, has many different hats. When performing her duties as the monarch of NZ, she takes off her "Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" hat, and puts on her "Her Majesty Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God Queen of New Zealand" hat. She's not the British Queen when dealing with us, she's *our* Queen. Same person, different role. This is the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, opening their pariament:  This is the Queen of New Zealand in her official portrait, wearing her NZ honours and regalia:  Somewhat important distinctions people fail to make. Now for all this talk of republic, we just saw what a shambles of a process we got stuck with trying to change the flag, does anyone really think the process by which we changed to a republic would be any better? I'd prefer we eventually became one I guess, but in all honesty would prefer to just leave well enough alone and stick with Her Majesty for all the difference it would make!
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 13:01
|
|
|
haha mate it's all sophistry
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
Bad timing for Phillip on that photo, makes it look like the Queen carved some prime british beef.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
BARONS CYBER SKULL posted:unrepentant sexual abuser You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
BARONS CYBER SKULL posted:an unrepentant sexual abuser Unrelated but I wonder what Mike Sabin is doing these days Ivor Biggun fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Mar 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
Isn't there another very prominent NZ'er facing multiple child abuse charges as well?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
Vulpes posted:You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means. Well unrepentant means he isn't sorry about it. Sexual means he probably got a chubby from it. Abuser means he did it without consent and to the detriment of someone else. What word do you mean?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
"an"
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
truther posted:Isn't there another very prominent NZ'er facing multiple child abuse charges as well? April is gonna be an interesting month, dunno if the trial can be delayed for another year. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/68156461/Prominent-New-Zealander-will-stand-trial-on-indecent-assault-charges-in-2016
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Ivor Biggun posted:Unrelated but I wonder what Mike Sabin is doing these days The unwilling, I believe
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 04:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 21:25 |
|
|
Ivor Biggun posted:April is gonna be an interesting month, dunno if the trial can be delayed for another year. Probably better for National it is dealt with this year as opposed to an election year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2016 05:20
|
|