Fear of the Unknown....

I was intrigued by some of the contradictory statements that emanated from one 'Ancient Geek' on The Standard today. As is the way in politics, I feel I can 'cherry-pick' the points to support my own argument, so here goes.

On one hand it was asserted that:

"John Key and the Nats do not have that level of credibility - basically no-one really knows what they plan to do or how much they are telling the public what they want to hear."

compared to:

"The Nats will probably die in the ‘national’ campaign from disappointments about the expectations they have already induced."

Now we all do it - get carried away with a line of argument which appears clear when we typed it, but, depsite sounding logical, actually falls down under analyisis, so I hope this critique is not seens as intended nastiness. It isn't.

What it indicates is the nervousness that can be stimulated by remaining an unknown quantity.

Looking also at a post here today by inventory2:

"I honestly believe that Labour don't quite know what to make of him, and the "not knowing" would make Helen feel decidedly uncomfortable (dare I say "not in control"??!!)- so maybe JK needs to keep them guessing for a bit longer!"

This brings me to the point about Key. is he setting himself to ride into Wellington on an ass with the crowds crying 'Hosannah!'?
Or will he end up on his ass with the crowds crying 'loser!' (excuse the stretched attempt at assonance.)

So, to address specifics:

National have floated some ideas and they went down like the proverbial Zeppelin. The fact that they floated them indicates a power-struggle within National. No right thinking potential PM would go with that kind of nonsense. So Key got jacked. pure and simple.
But it stretches credulity to suggest that the Nats seriously thought the public would go for it.
If they did they are evidently in the wrong trade.

So perhaps Key said 'fine, get it out of your system.' Perhaps now, they will listen to him.

Remember English got shot down by the divisive cabals within National. Perhaps Key and English share that common knowledge - the elite will stop at nothing to 'get you'.

What you have been witnessing is a very quiet power struggle from which Key will emerge victorious. The struggle has not been between Key and English, but by Key and English - to put the 'old-guard' of National in their place.

What is emerging is a democratised impulse in the Natinal higher ranks. This democratised leadership has only been compounded by the egregious (:0) EFB. Suddenly, Labour have, in their anxiety to sabotage National's battle-plan, begun to appear like the bad guys English and Key are starting to look like giant-killers.

Despite what Labour try to make of the Key English parnership, the fact is they are both 'local boys made good'. They share a common loathing of 'privilege' and both have historical rationales for why they should want to destroy priviledge and its trappings.

But above all, Key is keeping his hand well hidden. The Labour Party in government are trepidatious about launching policy too soon - it might be bettered by National. National feel they have no need to outline policy now, otherwise they would have done so.

Key is playing a very clever and confident game, by remaining silent.

Perhaos there is an attack strategy from Natiional waiting in the wings.

But Labour, until it knows what it is attacking, is on the back-foot.

However the waiting game will only work for so long. If the mind-games are to reap long-term benefits for National, National, and Key in particular, need to come out on the attack soon.

Before Christmas.

Is John the Key?

So the million dollar question has to be "Is John Key the next Prime Minister of New Zealand?"

And the million dollar answer is 'If enough people want it."

Then that begs the question 'Why would they want it?"

Looking at the situation as it stands, it is possible that Labour have become out of touch. However it does not follow that John Key is the only alternative to Helen Clark.
because there is nothing evidentially to suggest that National are any less out of touch than Labour are.

For example the idea of limited sales of SOEs - technically a viable concept, but evidently frightening to the voter who is scarred by memories of losing 'the family Silver' under Muldoon. (to quote my old man).

Kiwisaver, on the other hand was a positive and widely welcomed initiative.
Even when Labour introduced the EFB - a complete shambles of a Bill - the opposition failed to capitalise on it,

So it is evident that National are on the back foot. Not only because they have a paucity of modern, forward-thinking policies, but also because the electorate is still psychologically averse to National as the Labour alternative.

Then there is the albatross around National's neck - the 'Hollow Men' accusation.

The most sympathetic interpretation of the EB fiasco is that it was a strategic miscalculation. The least sympathetic is that it was an attmept to 'rort' the election.

Even though Labour have their own albatross - the Pledge Card fiasco - they appear hell-bent on pretending it was perfectly alright, and that the changes to the law under the EFB represents the lesser of the evils - ie it will stamp out National's 'rorting'.

Then there is the issue of leadership. Helen Clark is a leader as we all understand the term. This is the strongest suit that Labour has. The fact that she will not be around much longer (IMO) is frankly so frighteneing to the Labour Party and to New Zealanders that they have refused to countenance it. So the election will be fought on the polite fiction that Helen is here to stay.

In contrast, Key is yet to prove his leadership credentials. Sure he seems like a nice enough chap. But his credibility as a potential prime Minister is severely hampered by this 'nice' image.
coupled by a dearth of imaginative policies that can capture the imagination of the voter.

So as far as the voter is concerned, all is ok. Helen Clark is a safe pair of hands, and Key is a nice enough chap, but - well - not to be trusted.

As it stands, this perception is all John Key's fault. The job of the opposition is 'to oppose'. John Key has failed to do so with any traction. Helen Clark, on the other hand has merely to continue 'business as usual' to ensure her own survival. Agian this perception goes to the heart of what constitutes effective leasership.

Yje electorate is not stupid. It knows Hemen Clark has her faults. But it is waiting for a leafer with the balls to face her. Anything less is basically pointless. Nice guys really do come last.

I think at the moment the playing field is pretty level.

If I were to use a domestic analogy, Labour is the love-rat husband who the spouse with low-esteem will cling to for the sake of the kids. Key is the new guy on the block - the promise of a new beginning, but carries the doubt that he has the 'x-factor' to convince the wife to risk it all and leave.

Labour may rely on the 'It's better the devil you know' argument, National may suggest 'You can do better.'

Simpy, it is all about whether the kiwi electorate has the requisite courage and high enough self-esteem to trust its future to an unknown quantity.