The political recalculation to make from the brilliant Cannabis Referendum blindside & National’s flawed 42 joints attack
6 months ago the Cannabis referendum looked like it would die before it could be harvested.
Critical analysis breaking down New Zealand news coverage, media framing, and political narratives behind the headlines.
6 months ago the Cannabis referendum looked like it would die before it could be harvested.
Simon Bridges is desperately attempting to remain politically relevant in the cannabis debate after the Government blindsided National with a clearly defined referendum question and a clear set of guidelines to a regulated Cannabis market…
…when the enormity of what we are facing dawns on more and more NZers, spilled symbolic molasses will be the least of Simon’s concerns.
National’s argument is that a policy of constant harassment coupled with ‘offramps’ that help family and associates leave the Gang is the perfect combination of carrot and stick.
The fascinating cultural fiasco occurring at Mt Albert over the chopping down of 345 trees would be hilarious if it didn’t nudge at something deeply broken in our civics discourse.
Let’s be clear, personally I think National winning would be disastrous, and Labour must gain a second term. but Labour are not helping themselves with their politics of kindness inclusion glacial consensus making stuff because it means change is incredibly slow.
Stuart Nash needs to serve that audience a sacrificial head or else the conspiracy theories will take over and crazy extremist elements will dominate.
I want Labour to have a second term, but I fear they’re lack of dynamism and executive foresight to cauterise problems means they are still a 50-50 chance of being one term Government.
Labour’s message is ‘Labour – Let’s keep doing this’.
Really, and what is ‘this’ that we are doing? Incremental glacial change?
Anything requiring the title ‘strike force raptor’ should only apply to an actual dinosaur who has slipped through a time portal