DPF argues that John Key should rule Winston Peters out as a coalition partner after the election.
The logic of the rule-out is this: some of Peter’s voters are soft-National voters while some are soft-Labour voters. If National rules him out then the soft-National voters will desert him and vote National while the soft-Labour voters stay with him, but he drops below the 5% threshold so their votes are wasted.
Which seemed to work in 2008 but failed in 2011. I think National would be foolish to try it again. DPF’s case is that without Peters National would probably only spend one term in opposition while going into a third term with Peters will probably lead to a subsequent nine years in opposition.
Well I think any political strategist who tries to think like that is crazy. The goal is to get into government and stay there while you implement your policies. What if National rules out Peters, goes into opposition and David Cunliffe turns out to be a really popular, effective leader? What if there’s three years of sustained economic growth? What if the National Party disintegrates into civil war as soon as Key steps down?
On top of everything else, any coalition deal with Peters will probably involve a knighthood and posting to St James at the end of the term, and I think he’d work pretty hard to keep the government on track and make that a reality.
John Boscawen has put his hand up to be the ACT leader. Well, fair enough. He’s put plenty of time and money into the party. I would like to know if he was approached by National and asked to stand. He is, after all, a known quantity. Someone they’ve worked with in the past. Someone who will make a ‘good coalition partner’, ie someone who will keep their mouth shut and do as they’re told and not take any votes off National.
Pretty sweet job, ACT leader. National gives you an electorate and a Cabinet position paying about $260,000 a year, along with a limo and a leaders’ budget, all paid for by the taxpayer based on the total fallacy that you’re the ‘leader’ of a ‘political party’.
Lots of ink spilled about Kim Dotcom’s Internet party, including lots of speculation about who will vote for it. Young National voters! Young South Auckland voters! The 800,000 non-voters!
I haven’t seen any actual data but my assumption is that if Kim Dotcom attracts any votes at all it will be from the Green Party. If he has any impact on the election it will probably be here: pulling votes from the Greens and then wasting them because he doesn’t reach 5%, and thus ensuring a third term for National. But based on the last few days I’m more confident than his impact will be negligible. Politics is hard! It is, to quote Weber ‘The strong and slow boring of hard boards’. I might be wrong and Dotcom might release some Android app that effortlessly harvests votes from young South Aucklanders that care about data caps and digital privacy but I just can’t see it.