Strong team at leaking

Written By: - Date published: 7:43 am, October 9th, 2020 - 56 comments
Categories: election 2020, Judith Collins, national, same old national, Simon Bridges - Tags:

I wish they would stop doing this.  I want to write about Labour’s proposed changes to the RMA.  Because they are significant and contain lots of detail that need to be investigated further.

But National keeps leaking and self destructing and providing me with more to write about.  And a National MP or a number of National MPs are leaking and doing their best to undermine their leader Judith Collins as well as their campaign.

From Tova O’Brien at Newshub last night:

Newshub can reveal a lack of sympathy from National MPs for leader Judith Collins stems from perceived disloyalty from her.

Once again National MPs are leaking to Newshub saying there’s a communication breakdown between the leadership and the caucus.

The caucus apparently hasn’t seen internal polling for over a month now – nearly two. But Collins says her polls are looking good.

“We’re doing very well, thank you,” she said in Dunedin on Thursday.

Maybe they should disclose what Curia polling results are.  They won’t but this endless “our polls are better than the polls from Colmar Brunton/Reid Research/Roy Morgan” is tiresome.  They should put up or shut up.

And it seems that the leaker is from the Bridges faction, as opposed to the Muller faction.  Again from Newshub:

National MPs have told Newshub there’s a lack of sympathy for Collins because of the perception she was disloyal.

Collins says she’s “never asked anyone for sympathy”.

Newshub can reveal it stems back to April last year when Collins had a standoff with about half a dozen caucus colleagues who confronted her for failing to express support for then-leader Simon Bridges.

“I support the leader,” Collins said at the time, when repeatedly asked by Newshub to specifically say she supported Simon Bridges.

Leaking at this stage of the election campaign?  It looks like an overt sabotage job from an MP or MPs who want to lose as badly as possible.  National’s caucus meetings must be a real hoot right now.

And Judith is clearly feeling the effects and is spouting out some real gibberish suggesting that she still has a chance of being Prime Minister after the election.

The post election melt down will be tremendous to see.  I suspect that National will never be the same again.

56 comments on “Strong team at leaking ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Patricia Bremner 1
    9 October 2020 at 8:20 am

    We don't need to go there. It is their own self made mess, with a Wong Tung on top.

  2. mikesh 2
    9 October 2020 at 8:38 am

    Even ACT, under David Seymour, is looking more honorable these days than National. We may disagree with their policies, but they seem open, honest, and much more focused on what they want. National, under Judith Collins, just looks unsavoury and disorganized.

    • Hanswurst 2.1
      9 October 2020 at 8:51 am

      Even ACT, […] seem open, honest, and much more focused on what they want.

      Really? Looking at their list and the way they have allowed the gun lobby to latch onto them, I'm more inclined to say that ACT probably don't even know themselves what they want; they are likely to find out over the first months of the next parliament, however.

    • Chris 2.2
      9 October 2020 at 10:05 am

      Sure, but collins does seem to be holding the support above where English took the nats in 2002. That's a benchmark. The nats are obviously toast this election. But we want to see burnt toast.

      • Andre 2.2.1
        9 October 2020 at 10:12 am

        In 2002, disaffected moderate Nats had a couple of other viable options. They could vote for WinnieFirst, or the Hairdo from Ohariu Plus Cling-ons.

        This time disaffected moderate Nats have the choice of wasting their vote on waaay sub-threshold WinnieFirst or New Cons or TOP, or not voting, or choking down a heaping helping of dead rat and voting Nat.

        I'm guessing there's a lot of recipes for Sauce to Smother Dead Rat getting passed around in Nat circles right now.

      • Obtrectator 2.2.2
        9 October 2020 at 5:16 pm

        "But we want to see burnt toast."

        OK, as long as the toaster itself doesn't catch fire.

        • NZJester 2.2.2.1
          9 October 2020 at 7:02 pm

          I don't think it will have a chance to catch fire. At the sort of heat that looks to be coming their way it will simply melt into a pile of molten metal and the toast will be just a pile of carbon dust.

    • Anne 2.3
      9 October 2020 at 10:29 am

      @ mikesh.

      ACT honorable? Open, honest and more focused? They don't know what the words honorable, honest and open means. Focused yes, but on the kind of policies that would decimate our democratic system if they ever got a chance to implement them.

      Seymour is riding in on the back of the Euthanasia referendum. He's a one eyed pipsqueak who should never be allowed near the treasury benches. Last night's debate was a good example – simplistic statements and riding roughshod over the other leaders in his attempt to dominate the debate. That's not laudable stuff.

  3. Anker 3
    9 October 2020 at 9:26 am
    • Yeah, I think that Act looking good is the msm meme
    • tc 3.1
      9 October 2020 at 10:47 am

      Just like in prior elections particularly the 'cup of tea' stunt and the subsequent actions of nationals police where the MSM were played, like a guitar apparently.

      The media crush around that was sycophantic as they obediently trotted along with Banksie having to hold court till shonky arrived.

  4. Adrian 4
    9 October 2020 at 9:39 am

    My wife heard yesterday on one of the things she listens to that Seymour couldn't remember the names of possible Act caucus MPs beyond the first two or three.

    • anker 4.1
      9 October 2020 at 12:00 pm

      Adrian……….ha ha ha! re Seymour not remember his potential caucus. But why isn't this headlines?

      • Red Blooded One 4.1.1
        9 October 2020 at 12:28 pm

        To be fair (argh) Seymour did get to all the names eventually, It was reported on TV1 and a bit funny watching him wallow around blaming passing traffic until he finally remembered them all. Having said that I think it's a bit unfair those gotcha type questions, on the spot, same with "what's the price of …" etc

  5. Byd0nz 5
    9 October 2020 at 11:45 am

    Nats in disarray, hey hey, yay yay,
    Isn't it a lovely day,
    From the leader down the line up is poor,
    The sinking ship nears the ocean floor,
    Flotsam and jetsam will wash to the beach,
    Blond strands of hair and a bottle of bleach.
    Good bye to the party of austerity,
    Only for the richest, prosperity,
    Let us hope the sand sucks you down deep,
    So future generations hear not a peep.
    May you not rest in peace but writher in pain,
    And if you dare surface, we will red boot you again.

  6. anker 6
    9 October 2020 at 12:01 pm

    Love the pic for this post Mickey. One of many, many mis steps by the Nats along the way.

    Speaking of this mansplaining ad, wheres James nowadays?

  7. Michael who failed Civics 7
    9 October 2020 at 12:48 pm

    It looks to me that the Nats (+ACT, really the shock troops) will be formidable in the next Parliament. Although smaller in total number, the group will be far more ideologically united; if not actually neofascist, closer to it than before the election. It will also have support from white supremacist, religious fundamentalists, gun nutters (some overlap), all bankrolled by fatcats who calculate they'll get even richer while fragments of the non-rich fight it out. Meanwhile Labour offers pallid neoliberalism with no intention of disrupting the status quo, even though the model is unfit for the challenges of 21st century politics. The most we can hope for is a few Greens MPs in the mix to add a dash of fresh thinking and energy – unless Labour's strategy to drive them out of Parliament altogether (see the Auckland Central campaign) succeeds.

    • Ad 7.1
      9 October 2020 at 1:18 pm

      Unless Green Party sympathisers pull their damn finger out, they will be gone from Parliament and it will be a National+Act government. Not Labour mixed with a "dash" of anything.

      So wank on about the fascists and neoliberalism all you like, or save your breath and go knock on some doors to get your turnout up.

      • Andre 7.1.1
        9 October 2020 at 1:28 pm

        If it's any comfort, the voters in my circles that that used to vote Green but haven't this year have all gone to Labour.

        And the way the polls are looking, there will still need to be an awfully big swing back to Nact for them to get a larger vote share than Labour alone. Especially if the numbers of votes the Greens pull from Labour isn't enough to get them over 5%.

      • lprent 7.1.2
        9 October 2020 at 3:48 pm

        Pretty much my thoughts after reading 'Michael'.

        The probability of the Greens getting and holding an electorate seat over any length of time are minimal. In Auckland Central, if Labour tried to tell Labour voters that they should vote for a Green candidate, the majority would likely vote for a moderately acceptable National candidate.

        Michael is characteristic of the naivity and outright political stupidity that I often hear from some of the Greens and their supporters. Political parties and politicians don't own voters – they woo them.

        If you look at Auckland Central at present you can see the limits of the wooing from the Greens. They are behind the National candidate. If Labour did what the dimwitted Green supporters want, then they would still be behind the National candidate.

        They might get to 3x their party support instead of the double that they are getting right now. But most of the Labour electorate vote would go to the better candidate – the soft National candidate.

        FFS you get the impression that political morons like 'Michael's need to exerting some shoe leather at some time so that they can learn what real voters are like.

        • lprent 7.1.2.1
          9 October 2020 at 3:52 pm

          I'd point out that as a Labour supporter I will probably vote party vote Green this election purely to keep them in parliament – just as I have for the last two elections. I like MMP and recognize that if we want to keep it then keeping viable parties in circulation is worth voting against my other interests and inclinations.

          Reading a unrealistic lazy political fool like Michael makes me wonder why I should bother… It is like voting for Mana.

        • Incognito 7.1.2.2
          9 October 2020 at 4:03 pm

          But most of the Labour electorate vote would go to the better candidate – the soft National candidate.

          Why do you think that Emma Mellow is the better candidate?

          • lprent 7.1.2.2.1
            9 October 2020 at 10:40 pm

            More representative of their own position. Most of the electorate are rather centrist and have been getting more so over the last couple of decades.

            In a representative democracy, voters tend to look for electorate candidates who they think will represent them. That is why you see people like Nikki Kaye or Chris Bishop different to the general trend of their own party – but able to carry electorates that have party votes that should mean that they shouldn't carry their electorate.

            That guy in Central Melbourne is a good example about how to do that as a Green. But he does have an advantage because of the way he tends to ride in on preferences under STV.

            • Draco T Bastard 7.1.2.2.1.1
              9 October 2020 at 11:44 pm

              In a representative democracy, voters tend to look for electorate candidates who they think will represent them.

              No they don't. They look for a policy platform that broadly align with their values and then look for a candidate that fits. This usually results in people looking at the party platforms and then voting for the party's candidate.

              This is why independent politicians pretty much don't exist.

              That is why you see people like Nikki Kaye or Chris Bishop different to the general trend of their own party – but able to carry electorates that have party votes that should mean that they shouldn't carry their electorate.

              Or, more likely, FPP voting in electorates is putting the wrong candidate into parliament. Really need preferential voting in electorates.

              But he does have an advantage because of the way he tends to ride in on preferences under STV.

              I'm pretty sure that many safe seats would change hands under a preferential voting. Auckland Central is actually a good example:

              • VOTES COUNTED:
              • 30,070
              • 100.0%
              • LEADING CANDIDATE:KAYE, Nikki13,198
              • 2nd CANDIDATE:WHITE, Helen Ione11,617
              • MAJORITY:
              • 1,581
              • PARTY VOTE LEAD:National Party39.2%
              • 2nd PARTY:Labour Party37.7%

              I doubt if the 4170 Green Party voters would have put the National Party candidate as second preference.

        • Muttonbird 7.1.2.3
          9 October 2020 at 4:18 pm

          I though Michael was ok until the last half of the last sentence. I don't believe Labour have a strategy to drive the Greens out of parliament, but Labour have definitely swung right and have been timid in policy lest they scare the centrist vote.

          Backed down on tax reform and didn't support low-income earners into Kiwibuild houses. I also hate noises they are making about not wanting to address rampant house price growth.

          They really need a kick up the arse sometimes.

          • lprent 7.1.2.3.1
            9 October 2020 at 10:41 pm

            Such a self-entitled attitude. Reads like a lazy Conservative.

            • Michael who failed Civics 7.1.2.3.1.1
              10 October 2020 at 12:47 am

              At least I rattled the cages of a few complacent Labour Party hacks. I still believe the next NACT caucus will be a formidable challenge to Labour, particularly if the Greens don't make it back. The Nats will be much further to the Right than earlier iterations, even more so with ACT providing the shock troops and ideas. Neofascist is a useful shorthand description of their position – certainly not neoliberal, which is the position Labour occupies. I certainly hear your disdain for the Greens loud and clear. Any alliance with Labour will be purely tactical and cannot form a stable basis for cooperation. Another material difference to the NACT relationship. While Labour has some very competent people on its front bench, the same cannot be said for its caucus as a whole, while its membership looks decidedly rickety and threadbare. Smugness and complacency are perennial diseases in all middle class institutions; Labour in 2020 is no exception.

              • lprent …
                12 October 2020 at 9:58 am

                Well yes – you convinced me to party vote Labour yesterday. I've party voted Green for the last two elections to do help them get into parliament.

                With politically stupid dingbats like you around (and whoever the idiot was that decided to try for a 3-way split and a National MP in Auckland Central), the Greens simply don't need opponents. Some of their partisan dimwitted supporters can easily get rid of their friends.

    • Stunned mullet 7.2
      9 October 2020 at 5:41 pm

      Neofascist 🙄 the closest to a neofascist party in NZ parliament at present is NZF and they are not within a country mile of deserving that description.

    • Sacha 7.3
      9 October 2020 at 11:22 pm

      the group will be far more ideologically united

      Boy are you in for a surprise. 🙂

      • Michael who failed Civics 7.3.1
        10 October 2020 at 12:56 am

        Perhaps but the Nats will have lost many of their "liberal" caucus (eg Nikki Kaye). The remainder are on the right of the spectrum. 8-10 ACT MPs will have a big influence too. I don't see much ideological dissonance between them and the Nats. An interesting question is whether a harder-Right NACT opposition will drag Labour further in their direction? FWICS, that's distinctly possible.

        • Sacha 7.3.1.1
          10 October 2020 at 2:15 pm

          Look at the broader party, not just the caucus. Faction City.

          • Michael who failed Civics 7.3.1.1.1
            11 October 2020 at 1:06 am

            Does the "broader party" matter? It doesn't seem to in the case of the Labour Party. Perhaps that's because there is no "broader party", just the caucus.

            • Incognito 7.3.1.1.1.1
              11 October 2020 at 9:43 am

              Whataboutery = diversion attempt

            • Sacha 7.3.1.1.1.2
              11 October 2020 at 4:30 pm

              Eh? Of course you need to look at the whole apparatus of any party, not just the shopfront. Where do you think the decisions about direction are negotiated?

              • Michael who failed Civics …
                11 October 2020 at 7:05 pm

                Labour doesn't make its decisions at grassroots level. Neither do the Nats FWICS. With Labour power is tightly held by caucus and the highest echelon of the party machine. No one else gets a look in. And it shows, IMHO.

  8. nzlemming 8
    9 October 2020 at 2:04 pm

    ACT understand honour about as much as Collins understands 'woke'.

    [Please stick to one user name here, thanks]

  9. observer 9
    9 October 2020 at 2:25 pm

    Continuing a familiar story … today's campaigning:

    Ardern in Northland (Nat seat, could go Labour).

    Collins in Blenheim (part of safe Nat seat).

    In 2008-14 Key was all over shopping malls in South and West Auckland. Collins has barely set foot in the cities.

    • Uncle Scrim 9.1
      9 October 2020 at 2:41 pm

      Yeah well she definitely wouldn't want to walk about in central Wellington or, god forbid, Newtown. Things could go horribly wrong.

      • Draco T Bastard 9.1.1
        9 October 2020 at 3:10 pm

        You think that there may be a danger of her being confronted with reality if she went to the cities?

        • Uncle Scrim 9.1.1.1
          9 October 2020 at 3:21 pm

          I dunno, she loves Samoa so much I'm surprised she's not campaigning in Porirua.

      • mac1 9.1.2
        9 October 2020 at 3:30 pm

        According to our local MP, Judith "understands the needs of regional areas" especially viticulture and access to skilled and RSE labour.

        He or she never understood the decline in social services, the effect of the sale of state housing, the huge local housing pressure based on the need for housing 3000 seasonal workers, the decline in potable water, the degradation of the Sounds for timber and unsustainable fishing, the highest cost for supermarket food, the lowest wage area next to the East Coast in the country.

        But the 180 well off citizens in the Whitehaven Room today come to listen to Collins in Blenheim today did not fully understand, either.

        • PaddyOT 9.1.2.1
          9 October 2020 at 4:14 pm

          So on Judith's visit to Blenheim , the wine industry needs to also know the National party would seriously undermine the wine industry, scuttling 'free ' student training in vineyard plant horticulture and winemaking cellar production in the region.

          NMIT Trades training for viticulture currently free for much needed shortage of qualified viticulturists in a large growth industry.

          With NMIT being a large tertiary training provider closely aligned to the regions industries that would also be an enormous fishing and sustainable aquaculture industry impacted too.

          * Natz policy – "Consider reintroducing fees on first year of study and first two years of training".

          And in bed with ACTZ

          * Act policy- " Reintroduce fees on first year of study and first two years of training" and " Remove the cap on fees for tertiary institutions".

          https://www.nmit.ac.nz/study/filter/all/fees-free/targeted-training-and-apprenticeship-fund

    • Peter 9.2
      9 October 2020 at 6:06 pm

      Ardern in Northland (Nat seat, could go Labour)?

      Willow-Jean Prime would need a stack of those who might have voted for Jones to vote for her. A vote for Jones is a wasted vote.

  10. ianmac 10
    9 October 2020 at 3:47 pm

    Penk was due to travel to ummm? to cast his vote on Monday. The message from the WH was that the trip was off. No explanation.

  11. mosa 11
    9 October 2020 at 4:37 pm

    " I suspect that National will never be the same again "

    No Luxon will be the healing balm to the many open wounds in the next caucus. National always rises like a phoenix from the ashes. Covid will be just another memory in 2023.

    • hanswurst 11.1
      10 October 2020 at 1:25 am

      I think there's a strong element of counting chickens before they've hatched with regard to Luxon, actually. Ardern's rise was rather abrupt when it finally eventuated, and came rather from left-field for most observers. Key's rise was relatively obviously sign-posted, but the official story of how he came to the top was a novel one in the context of NZ politics.

      Whether the vision of Luxon as leader is chiefly his own or the National Party's, it has been very clearly telegraphed, and has a broadly ring to Key's (successful in the corporate world, took a pay cut to serve the country as a politician, and maybe to rub some of his stardust off on the populace). He might find that the electorate just sees him as a boring retread.

      • Michael who failed Civics 11.1.1
        11 October 2020 at 7:07 pm

        I don't think Luxon's going to save them. But Crusher certainly isn't out for the count. The "wealth tax" billboards and word of mouth campaign seems to have been a diabolical masterstroke. I wouldn't be surprised if Satan was directing their campaign.