The BFD | Has National Leapt From the Frypan Into the Fire?

They say a week is a long time in politics. Maybe even a couple of hours can be a long time in politics. So much can change in such a short time.

So here we are in week two of the leadership change and the question of the day is: How has the change of leadership turned out for the National Party?

Recently I wrote a post citing 10 reasons why Simon Bridges polls so badly. I wonder where Todd Muller fits on those:

He looks young, barely out of school – the perception of immaturity is high

Nope, you couldn’t say that about Mr Muller. He is mature and looks it.

When speaking, he lacks credibility and authority

Yes, so far this certainly applies

His voice is not deep and authoritative – it’s light and he often sounds whiny

Certainly not as light as Simon’s and certainly not whiny, but still not deep and authoritative

He has poor diction and pronunciation which further reduces the perception of maturity and credibility

No, his diction and pronunciation are passable

He always looks as though he’s trying way too hard which makes him appear insincere

Yes, that fits for sure

He is incongruent – body language and vocal tone too often don’t match the words he’s saying

Partly true – arm waving and over-emphasis look unnatural and cause doubt about the messaging

He seldom laughs, smiles or is warm and engaging – when he does laugh it appears forced rather than relaxed and natural

Early days yet but a bit stiff and serious – probably based more on nerves than anything else. He has work to do on this

His political thermometer is confused – the subjects he chooses as issues too often don’t resonate with the electorate

Maybe more a case of not having a political thermometer than a confused one

Even when making a strong point, he delivers it in the same monotone as everything else he says so the point is too often lost. He uses far too many words – the strong elements, when there are any, are lost in the padding

Yes. Not so much a monotone but certainly over speaking and not addressing the issues concisely (why Jack Tame interrupted him so much). Wishy-washy springs to mind

He doesn’t accept and deal with personal criticism well. He tries to look strong and decisive. It has the opposite effect

Too early to comment on personal criticism but trying to look strong and decisive is a weakness and he’s certainly getting the opposite effect

The stakes are far higher for Todd Muller than many people (possibly including himself) actually realised. He has taken on a huge job at probably the most difficult time possible and while many had been pleading for a leadership change for some time, very few saw this one coming.

It would probably be fair to say that once the announcement was made, the electorate at large were reasonably ambivalent and happy to stand back and see what happened. It didn’t take long to start to unravel and the unravelling is continuing.

In the current political environment, the one thing that’s needed is clear and decisive leadership. Trying to be all things to all people seldom works even at the best of times. When times are tough, you need to choose a path and deliver the plan for taking it, along with the vision of what will happen when we get there.

Nobody’s interested in a dabbler and so far, the only policy announcement from Mr Muller has been a weak dabble that leaves the vacant lot still vacant. Give us a vision – any vision – something to believe in – anything.

If Todd Muller wants to show he has what it takes, he has only days to do it. He should start by sweeping the back room clean. His advisors are hopelessly inept and out of touch with “the people”. He needs to surround himself with competent people who have a feel for “the people” and he needs to follow their instructions and advice totally and completely.

I repeat: Give us a vision – Any vision.