1. Forum
  2. Usenet NZ Messa
  3. NZ.GENERAL

  • Who are the Nat-bots here?

    From Crash@3:770/3 to All on Saturday, November 19, 2016 20:29:30
    Rich has reported that there are Nat-bots here.

    I cannot recall anyone posting overtly pro-National views here.

    Who are they? Anyone who opposes Rich's views I suspect. Labour has
    yet to discover how to win back the levels of support amongst voters
    that it got while in government in the early part of this century.
    After 8 years I have to wonder if they will ever find the magic key.


    --
    Crash McBash

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Tony @3:770/3 to Crash on Saturday, November 19, 2016 02:14:53
    Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> wrote:
    Rich has reported that there are Nat-bots here.

    I cannot recall anyone posting overtly pro-National views here.

    Who are they? Anyone who opposes Rich's views I suspect. Labour has
    yet to discover how to win back the levels of support amongst voters
    that it got while in government in the early part of this century.
    After 8 years I have to wonder if they will ever find the magic key.


    --
    Crash McBash
    I am not a Nat-bot as indeed I am sure that you are not! Indeed I do not follow any particular party or political path.
    It may well be that I would be called a floating voter by some, probably disparagingly, but there is nothing wrong with voting for the candidates or party that would be best for the people that we care about most - indeed I believe that is exactly what we should do, regardless of party politics
    My father, who I respected and admired, believed that Labour was the only path to follow and that Margaret Thatcher was the spawn of the devil. I have been able to follow my own path however.
    I cannot understand why anybody would be ashamed of their party political affiliations, but equally I cannot understand why anybody would be ashamed of not having any - I have none and I resent it whem people say that I should have an affiliation - they are wrong and indeed seriously misguided. My biggest concern with Rich is that it appears that he cannot accept that someone can be devoid of political beliefs which is what, in my opinion, has caused wars and genocide.
    I have voted for candidates in the past of differing political persuasions and will continue to give my support to whichever person and whichever party I believe will provide the best environment for my loved ones. Anything different is stupidity so far as I am concerned.
    I voted for the David Lange government because I believed that Rob Muldoon had completely lost the plot. In fact I met David Lange on two occasions and was blown away with his intellect; he was also a very nice and extremely funny man. That does not mean he was a great Prime Minister - just a very smart, personable and committed man.
    Tony

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From george152@3:770/3 to Crash on Sunday, November 20, 2016 08:56:17
    On 11/19/2016 8:29 PM, Crash wrote:
    Rich has reported that there are Nat-bots here.

    I cannot recall anyone posting overtly pro-National views here.

    Who are they? Anyone who opposes Rich's views I suspect. Labour has
    yet to discover how to win back the levels of support amongst voters
    that it got while in government in the early part of this century.
    After 8 years I have to wonder if they will ever find the magic key.

    In his small world any-one advocating from a common sense POV must be a
    Nat :)
    Long may they continue thinking so

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Pooh@3:770/3 to All on Sunday, November 20, 2016 12:20:59
    On 20/11/2016 8:56 a.m., george152 wrote:
    On 11/19/2016 8:29 PM, Crash wrote:
    Rich has reported that there are Nat-bots here.

    I cannot recall anyone posting overtly pro-National views here.

    Who are they? Anyone who opposes Rich's views I suspect. Labour has
    yet to discover how to win back the levels of support amongst voters
    that it got while in government in the early part of this century.
    After 8 years I have to wonder if they will ever find the magic key.

    In his small world any-one advocating from a common sense POV must be a
    Nat :)
    Long may they continue thinking so

    Hear! Hear!

    Hell if I'm a Nat bot as Rich has claimed falsely on so many occasions
    I'd like to see his explanation for why I voted Labour 1999,2002,2005.
    I've told him several times but with his comprehension skills and stupid attitude to any who question his bullshit he'll be sure to have had a
    brain wipe and won't (as with everything else) have a clue :)

    Pooh

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)
  • From Pooh@3:770/3 to Crash on Monday, November 21, 2016 16:27:39
    On 19/11/2016 8:29 p.m., Crash wrote:
    Rich has reported that there are Nat-bots here.

    I cannot recall anyone posting overtly pro-National views here.

    Who are they? Anyone who opposes Rich's views I suspect. Labour has
    yet to discover how to win back the levels of support amongst voters
    that it got while in government in the early part of this century.
    After 8 years I have to wonder if they will ever find the magic key.


    --
    Crash McBash

    When you consider how vociferous the likes of Rich and victor got when
    Haggers 'Dirty Politics' was published and their denial of my claim that
    ALL political party's practice dirty politics it makes it pretty clear
    just who is and may be the bots in the ng.

    Pooh

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)