John Armstrong: Labouring under an electoral delusion
Well might the biblical warning about reaping what you sow haunt David Cunliffe as he delivers his first speech to a Labour Party conference as leader.
Without question, this afternoon’s address will be a rousing, and at times electrifying and inspirational affair, paying homage to Labour icons and more than touching base with the party’s core constituency of the low-paid and the jobless.
Which will be just as well. Because there is precious little else on show at this conference so far to rouse, electrify or inspire voters – especially mainstream ones – to even think about taking a fresh look at Labour.
Yawn. Uncle Armstrong seems to be parroting his corporate owners mantra again, ‘No left turn, no left turn, no left turn’. His report on the dangers of Labour going left reads more like a tribute to McCarthyism than legitimate political punditry.
If there is any payback bitterness he is alluding to in this column, it’s from him and his total inability to comprehend that the Conference last year wasn’t about the manufactured leadership coup he and others breathlessly reported upon but was about affiliates and grassroots members taking control of their party.
What Armstrong fails to appreciate is that Labour are now a democratic Party being shaped by its members. Armstrong may loath democracy, the Labour Party members do not.
Armstrong’s argument is that Labour won’t appeal to ‘mainstream’ (National Party) voters with their step to the left. Really?.
Labour are not following the Pagani Doctrine by trying to win over National Party voters, Labour are stepping to the left to attract the 800 000 voters who were enrolled last election, but who just didn’t bother to vote. The latest crap poll by Stuff that was trumpeting a flop for Labour doesn’t point out the largest revelation of that poll – that almost 22% of those asked didn’t know who they were going to vote for, it’s those ‘don’t knows’ that Labour need to win over, not Armstrong’s ‘mainstream’ (National Party) voters.
Why is Armstrong’s argument to target ‘mainstream’ (National Party) voters such arse? 70% of National Party voters don’t know anyone unemployed, Labour’s message of inequality and social justice is utterly invisible to vast chunks of National Party voters, time spent trying to win over such a gated culture is wasted energy and the toning down of rhetoric would need to be so large that it will kill off base Labour Party support.
Stepping to the Left will win David Cunliffe the 2014 election, stepping back towards Armstrong’s ‘mainstream’ centre will gain him nothing.
Armstrong can be insightful at times. This is not one of those times.
Funnily enough I came here specifically to seek an alternative to Armstrong’s opinion.
Right on the money. I put it less politely -Herald didn’t print it.
From the view I have of state affairs , my fear is that we kiwis have no political Left , or Right for that matter .
We have monkeys dancing to the corporate organ grinder . That’s much more obvious to me than a group of gentle persons struggling with ideals to make the world a better place for those whom they serve .
Our politicians are not much more than corporate employees and we are slaves .
We Kiwis need to orchestrate a commercial revolution against the banks and money lenders . Against the Insurance Scum and the real estate industry . That’s where our enemies skulk and yet we ‘ chin in hand ‘ ponder political maneuvering as if it matters . It does not matter . It doesn’t matter what Cunliffe does or who he rouses because we all know that naught will come of it . We all know by now that jonky can slither out of any of his past , present and future lies with a shrug and an ‘ I’m comfortable with that . ‘ comment while he telegraphs ‘ I don’t give a fuck what you think ‘ in his body language .
You said in an earlier Post that the population of Oamaru represented those few who earned above a six figure salary and that those 32 k therefore steered the economy .
Parliament Buildings holds about 120 seats upon which 120 fat arses rest . 120 . They are the focusing mechanism that draws our attention to the devious machinations that’s the skeleton of Big Business so as Big Business doesn’t get too psychopathic on us and those 120 are failing to do their job for us . They’re failing us on their six figure salaries .
I see from over at tv 3 that cunliffe proposes a State Insurer for us all . Aww . How nice . Who’ll do the banking for that ? Westpac ? Westpac already cover the cops and the IRD .
I also see that Labour is about to debate dumping the Queen as our head of state . Jonky might help with that . He’s the traitor in charge right now .
If we can’t find one single leader within the 120 politicians who sit in the House then who the fuck are we going to ‘ vote ‘ for as El Presidente ?
A Pagani ? Or a Wewegi ? Maybe Len could have a crack at it ? He’s hollow enough to accommodate any corporate agenda .
I have two words for our socio/economic/political future .
We’re fucked .
I think there’s a spelling mistake in the banner headline…
And I’m not sure I want an onsite president. The Queen’s better: she’s far away and doesn’t interfere, much.
Perhaps our president could live in Australia and call by for duties on a few of our special days. A small honorarium and free travel/accommodation. They can have a real job… And, with technology, they could work from home to sign things from Parliament.
If Australia’s too dear – perhaps they could be a Chatham Islands resident? The fishing’s pretty good.
I got the distinct impression that Roughan wrote the article but published it under Armstrong’s name.
I personally think National knows it will lose next year. Hence the announcement by Bill English that he will be a list MP next year.
“Stepping to the Left will win David Cunliffe the 2014 election, stepping back towards Armstrong’s ‘mainstream’ centre will gain him nothing.
Armstrong can be insightful at times. This is not one of those times.”
I tend to find that those times tend to be the ones where his gerontocratic tendencies are held in check, instead of proudly on show. Thankfully TDB now provides an alternative at all times.
I’m with Country Boy. Unless we accept his reasonable and inevitable conclusion, we will never act, within a manageable time frame, to avert the multiplicity of diverse and divergent calamities that awaits our sprogs. Looks like your on your own folks. I’m off to build my ark.
Agree that Lab dont’t need to curry favour with “National voters”.
But I don’t think we need to let the MSM get away with saying that “centre voters” – ie, swing voters, who have got National in the last two elections – are actually a politcal “centre” rather than a shifting segment of persuadable individuals who don’t know politics, but know what they do and do not like. The last (admittedly placid) Labour government built up people’s contentment and hopes, which made the ignorant get greedy and swing – but by now this government has stomped all over these hopes, especially in this term. In this sense, there are a lot of a lot voters who went National last time that are open to persuasion.
And as far as “taking the country left” goes, it needs to be pointed out to the MSM ad nausea that this is an emminently SENSIBLE idea after veering right for almost 30 years now. We passed the centre line long ago, and some course correction is desperately needed, and most people realise that. The “need for change” that Key’s government co-opted as a change from Clark is still felt by the majority.
I agree. New Zealanders are looking for fresh solutions to the problems they face – not rehashed, right-wing dogma rammed down their throats once again, irrespective of which bunch of political actors occupies the Beehive. Not all the ideas debated at the conference were sensible and not all the sensible ideas will be implemented by a Labour-led government, either. But at least the Party had the confidence to debate ideas in public, regardless of whether they were good or bad. It remains to be seen whether the caucus will maintain its tradition of treating the Party’s membership with contempt once it attains the baubles of office once more.
Comments are closed.