Here we are into the second month of the new year with an election looming in what will feel like a very short eight months. Whoever would have thought in December, as we were approaching Christmas, that the new year would bring so much change so quickly.
With Jacinda Ardern’s resignation, the political picture has completely changed. Her personal polling was looking like a barometer plunging the depths of a massive cyclone: so low and dropping so fast that you’d soon have needed to dig a deep hole in the ground to get a reading.
Whether her resignation was a carefully planned strategic move to resuscitate what little hope was left for the party or not, it has resulted in an immediate, albeit probably very temporary, upsurge in the party’s fortunes.
How useful are the polls? Not very would be the obvious answer given how far of the mark they’ve ended up being. As many politicians are fond of saying (usually when their own ratings are crashing): “The only poll that counts is the one on election day.”
Perhaps the most useful thing about polls is the surge of hope they bring when they feed our own cognitive biases and confirm what we were thinking or hoping for. Otherwise, we gaze in wonderment at the numbers and wonder how those others could be so stupid.
It’s not on the basis of polling or indeed any other pseudo or even real science that I pose the question: Does the National Party offer a credible alternative that will bring about a change of government in October, or will voters be so indifferent that they won’t bother voting at all?
National have a history of not making changes and in recent years have strayed so far from their founding principles that it’s really difficult to know where they stand on anything. That the current leader seems unable to stitch together a clear and concise statement on anything without adding in something that renders it irrelevant, is surely a contributing factor. He reminds me so much of Todd Muller, floundering about trying to please everybody and looking as though he has no spine. That’s never a good sign for a leader and he’s been there long enough to be doing better.
So with National looking like a weak alternative, we look to ACT as potentially having what it takes to make up for the failings of the main, so called centre-right party. But is Seymour any better than Luxon? Has ACT committed to enough of the changes the electorate wants to see? Can anybody name any of the ACT MPs other than Seymour? Does anybody know what they’ve achieved in the time they’ve been there?
This year has the potential to be a very interesting election year but could just as easily turn into a total bore if the opposition parties don’t get some policies for real change in front of us and show us they have what it takes to do what needs to be done.
There is always a great danger that unless there’s a driving force of difference, the electorate will stay with the devil they know.
Then there’s always whatever surprise Winston Peters can and will bring to the table. Those who have written him off do so at their own peril.
