Cunliffe versus Key – debate #3

Another debate, another round of media obsessed with declaring winners and losers, another reliance on ‘polling’ that is so unscientific it should be eliminated as potentially misleading.

The debate revealed little other than more practiced lines.

Both Key and Cunliffe sounded competent enough at media presentation but both talked over their opponent and squabbled childishly too much.

There was not much indication of how a National led or Labour led Government might look.

The quality of the respective party candidates was totally absent from consideration.

How potential coalitions might look and might work was not examined at all. One party’s policies matter but what might be negotiated post-election is also critical.

What are the chances ACT push National into bringing forward their proposed tax cuts to early in the next term rather than in the third year?

Would Greens push Labour to increase the top tax rate to 38%? The minimum wage to $18?

What Cabinet position might Winston Peters negotiate? Russel Norman? Colin Craig?

I have no more idea now than before any of the three debates Cunliffe and Key have had so far.

I’m no closer to deciding who to vote for.

I doubt many people will have changed their minds after watching last night’s debates.

Pundit perceptions can be quite different to normally how disinterested voters see things.

John Campbell did a reasonable job most but struggled to control the squabbling for superiority (or sneerority)  at times. He closed the debate with a bizarre speech that tried to liken voting in New Zealand in 2014 with standing in front of a tank in China in 1989.

The fourth debate on Sunday is likely to reveal nothing other than more practiced pontificating.

Leave a comment


  1. LOL @ “sneerority” and “practiced pontificating”

  2. Is it a Labour trait to talk over anyone with a different view. It was prevalent with Clark, and Goff took this on board, now they all do it, even the suspect King. How does Cunliffe get these facial contortions, does he get tips from Campbell, or does he have a nut squeezer built into his pants? He looks like a strangled goose or a real f/wit!

  3. supergoldcardholder

     /  11th September 2014

    i thort the winner last nite was winston peters….anyone that sez theyre going to take gst off residential rates gets my vote…two ticks NZF!!

  4. Brown

     /  11th September 2014

    I think the best bit is that it appears they don’t like or respect each other. Given the supposed differences in their politics that’s how it should be – if you stand for free enterprise (I wish) you can’t (at this level) be mates with marxists and unionists.

    I note Key got blamed for dragging up the CGT again when in fact Campbell did.

    What was interesting to me was the public view as expressed by the 4 people on the Labour couch. The granny has always voted Labour and would do so no matter how incompetent they were. Die hard National fans appear no different so that’s all a bit pointless.

    Key appears more personable but Cunners lacks something. Its like watching Dawkins and Lennox debate – Lennox has a warmth that is inviting but Dawkins just seems up himself.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s