Just putting this comment from Lindsay Perigo on record here.
One great thing about Sir Roger, as I argued recently, is that he's a conviction politician. But his convictions are not libertarian. If anything, Roger's return opens things up even more for Libz. Rodney's born-again soft-cockery and Roger's compulsionism mean the chasm between Libz and ACT is greater than ever. We are unique.
And no way will ACT get 130,000 votes. They'll be lucky to get 30,000.
130,000 votes based on 2005 results is about 5.7 percent - 30,000 around 1.4 percent.
I won't be making any predictions about whether the Libertarianz can get any more than the 946 votes they received in 2005.
We shall see.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Does anyone outside his shrinking cult take this buffoon seriously? I don't think so. But this is a man who thinks he's more Randian than Rand, he is the Procrustian bed by which all others are measured. He is the great, the one, the only guru and fount of all knowledge. Right!
FFS- I support the Libertarianz, but I will also support those who are the nearest to us! The enemies of my enemies may be me friends.
Feckin Objectivists!
Well I'm voting on principle, the Libz - they are the only answer to not just paring back this enormous and vicious State we are all under the thumb of, but ridding us of it, and allowing a free society to flourish from the free individual up. And I am open and honest about it unlike the first poster who is not prepared to put a name to his or her thoughts.
Mark Hubbard
Mark Hubbard
Principled!!! Was it principled to have the Libz host their worshipped leader's birthday using parliament? They could have hosted it at one of his favorite bars. But they got his acolyte Deborah Coddington to get them a room in parliament which inevitably means taxpayer funds went to support Perigo's birthday party. I assume they didn't pay for the wine -- there was a budget surplus that year. The reality is that not even other libertarians think highly of NZ's weird personality cult.
I'll hazard a guess and say Libz will get around 1500 votes.
The whole organisation is way too incestuous and cliquey to attract many more.
"The whole organisation is way too incestuous and cliquey ... "
Congrats ! That is perhaps the most apt and tangible description of the NZ libertarian movement I've ever seen.
To be fair its only the holier than thou Objectivists that cause the problems....they are too stupid to realise that one can be a Libertarian without being an Objectivist...though I belive that Objectivism is the only non contradictory basis for holding Libertarian political belifes..
The best libertarian NZ ever had,Jim Peron, was rail roaded out by these envy ridden snakes because he dared to do his own thing and not kiss Perigos arse..
The UK now has a Libertarian Party which is clearly not objectivist.
Would people support such a party in NZ? With the untidy mess of ACT & Libz encroaching on this turf, is there any prospect of getting such a party off the ground?
Dave Christian
Interestingly James, I went to a libertarian sponsored event some years ago, and not one person talked to me except Peron. Everyone huddled in their little groups. I felt really unwelcome.
I don't support Peron, but it says something about the cliqueyness of the party.
Jim could engage easily with non-libertarians. I think he often found them more interesting. But he always sought to win people over to his views using good-natured persuasion.
The below thread is written by Mark Hubbard. Note how I'm prepared to put my name to my thoughts - it's called being honourable.
This thread is unbelievable. 'Cliques' - you won't vote for the only party promoting freedom of the individual because you felt left out at a conference! It's a political party, not a tea party.
And all the people here supporting Jim Peron. I don't know him, but a single Google search this morning has brought up the following amongst what looks like a slew of paedophilic references:
http://www.qna.net.nz/news/469.html
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=19962237&postID=9173561475610464371
So if the Libz were responsible for getting him away from NZ's youngsters, they go up in my estimation, and Hide's support, and yours Lindsay, just rockets ACT down. What's the basis of ACT's support of this man then?
As I said, unbelievable.
Mark Hubbard
Mark, "And all the people here supporting Jim Peron."
Hold your horses. That's all two of us. James and I. Nothing new there. Ruth merely commented on his friendliness.
I base my views about Peron on what I know of the man first-hand. I trust his word.
Mark Hubbard bases his beliefs on what Winston Peter's says. That is always dangerous to anyone who values truth.
I have no truck with Peters. Of far more danger to truth are those that would hide behind anonymity to release their poisoned arrows and their bile. To call Libz or Objectivism a cult is to surf a huge chip tumbling off very narrow shoulders.
Why not front up with your name?
Lindsay: I can't comment on Peron, I don't know him, but there's a hell of a lot of links to him, for all the wrong sort of reasons. But that's not conclusive and I don't have time to chase them all up. All I can say is he would seem a very dangerous horse to be backing.
My vote remains firmly with the only party that is advocating the freedom of the individual: Libz.
Mark Hubbard
I am inclined to think ACT will do rather well at the General Election now Sir Roger is back.
I have actually had $1000 bets with several people that ACT gets 130,000 party votes!
The Libertarian party will probably do very well, compared with previous elections, probably 20,000 votes.
Better than a poke in the eye.
I am also am admirer of Jim Peron. I also appreciate the writings of CLS at freestudents.blogspot.com, although I strongly suspect that CLS is Jim Peron.
Don't get duped by name calling Mark. Notwithstanding, ideas don't vary according to who voices them.
Dave Christian
Post a Comment