Over at Kiwiblog DPF blogs:
I’ve blogged at Curiablog the results of the One News and 3 News polls.
Both polls have National up and Labour and Greens down. Shearer’s preferred PM numbers have also dropped, which will put the acid on him from his caucus.
I think the polls reflect that the Government has got through the various distractions and issues of the first six months, and is now concentrating on implementing its programme. The other factor is that Labour are not a convincing alternative yet, and in fact are going backwards.
We agree with DPF's assessment in his final paragraph. In particular, it seems that the heat has gone out of the asset sales debate. Despite the fact that Labour and the Greens are still collecting signatures for the PPIR petition, nothing is going to change the Government's plans.
Labour especially needs to concede defeat. As they continue to focus on a battle that has already been fought and lost, the 2014 election draws nearer day by day. If Labour's backward direction in the polls continues, Labour's caucus will get nervous and that could have implications for the leadership, especially if David Shearer is not the preferred leader for the union lobby that now controls 20% of the vote.
8 comments:
I think Labour should continue to fight asset sales. The more often Shearer gives his speeches against them, full of false bravado, empty of conviction (he knows that the effect of selling them is minor) he makes National look more convincing. I can't tell if someone in Labour's caucus or back-office thinks there are still votes to be won over asset sales, or if they are all just too proud to let it go, but it's a brilliant strategy to ensure continued polling and electoral misery. If votes were there to be collected over asset sales, Labour and the Greens (and NZF etc) collected them already.
The Labour Party is insane "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." I believe that quote comes from Albert Einstein. They think the CIR will make a difference... I doubt it. Labour ignored two overwhelming CIR's in 1999 and won the next two elections.
They are on a path to failure, and have no other ideas than Shearer's totally undefined "economic reform" and "keeping our assets". They are fighting a rearguard action on economic policy (or saying they agree with National). Even their social issues battles (eg. same-sex marriage) may be won from opposition. Why would you vote for them?
They are doing exactly what they should, in my book. :D
You threaten to blog more lightly but fail to deliver upon this threat. What gives?
So basically what you're saying is "we won, you lost, eat that". When the left said it it was intolerable arrogance. When the right say it it's democracy perfected. There's a name for that, isn't there?
Well in 1999, the two referenda were based on populist BS, so I pretty much think the government was right to ignore them. Reducing the size of parliament is not a good idea, most MPs have a very high workload as is, and government caucuses would be too small to place any limits on Cabinet. The other was about the justice/corrections system and was vague and broad, but forcing inmates to do hard labour is pretty counterproductive really.
I'm not really an advocate of great amounts of direct democracy and referenda unless it's really necessary. Like fundamental constitutional changes. The general public are not well informed or particularly attentive to the machinations of economic or fiscal policy.
And anyway, I didn't make a moral judgement on any refusal to act on referenda, merely a political point that ignoring those did not cost Labour the subsequent elections.
I wasn't talking to you, and you've missed the point entirely.
Speaking of intolerable arrogance...see post at 12:38
Yes, telling the truth is utterly intolerable for right-wingers Lofty, my wee boy. Well-spotted.
@ Knickerbockers - it was a qualified threat. I didn't know if we would have Internet at our lodgings. We have, so limited blogging ensues.
Post a Comment