Will Phil Goff Replace Helen Clark? Not Likely
There is some speculation at the moment that Phil Goff is weighing up his chances of replacing Helen Clark as Labour leader.
From Fran O'Sullivan Hat Tip David Farrar
The prospects of a palace revolt led by Labour’s dwindling centre-right will just get Clark’s and Labour Party president Mike Williams’ backs up further. The only way Goff will succeed ahead of the election is to persuade Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen to lead a deputation to persuade Clark to step aside. In the meantime if Moore continues to scratch Clark’s wounds she will fire back.
Clark patiently rebuilt Labour, with the aid of Williams, into a tight political machine. They made sure the selection process was geared to ensure that only MPs of “left persuasion” who would stay loyal to Clark would get into Parliament.
The upshot is the Labour caucus is stacked with former unionists and severely lacking in business people, farmers and others who would provide more balanced views, or even dare to challenge Clark.
This means Goff must persuade Labour’s left he has the right stuff to ensure the party can maintain mainstream support. If the polls continue to move against Clark, the prospect of losing their parliamentary positions and salaries will concentrate MPs’ minds.
If Labour's so called "right" could not stand up to Helen Clark over the anti-smacking bill, (when they were under huge public pressure to do so), from where will they get the balls to depose NZ's preferred Prime Minister?
Labour's strategy is to stay left, keep Helen Clark and try to discredit National's leader, John Key.
The left-which is most of Labour's caucus would rather lose the next election under Helen Clark, than lose under Phil Goff.
If they stay with Helen and destroy John Key, they may yet win. If they lose, at least they will preserve the left's iron grip on the Labour machine.
The left plays for the long term.
Demographics and society in general are moving their way.
If they have to let National in for a term or two to clean up and take the blame for their economic disasters, so be it.
Of course, some Labour MPs desperate to retain their seats may try something, but I will be very surprised if they can muster the numbers.
I think the next election will be fought between Clark and Key, but if only one leader survives up to that point, I'm betting it will be Clark.
From Fran O'Sullivan Hat Tip David Farrar
The prospects of a palace revolt led by Labour’s dwindling centre-right will just get Clark’s and Labour Party president Mike Williams’ backs up further. The only way Goff will succeed ahead of the election is to persuade Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen to lead a deputation to persuade Clark to step aside. In the meantime if Moore continues to scratch Clark’s wounds she will fire back.
Clark patiently rebuilt Labour, with the aid of Williams, into a tight political machine. They made sure the selection process was geared to ensure that only MPs of “left persuasion” who would stay loyal to Clark would get into Parliament.
The upshot is the Labour caucus is stacked with former unionists and severely lacking in business people, farmers and others who would provide more balanced views, or even dare to challenge Clark.
This means Goff must persuade Labour’s left he has the right stuff to ensure the party can maintain mainstream support. If the polls continue to move against Clark, the prospect of losing their parliamentary positions and salaries will concentrate MPs’ minds.
If Labour's so called "right" could not stand up to Helen Clark over the anti-smacking bill, (when they were under huge public pressure to do so), from where will they get the balls to depose NZ's preferred Prime Minister?
Labour's strategy is to stay left, keep Helen Clark and try to discredit National's leader, John Key.
The left-which is most of Labour's caucus would rather lose the next election under Helen Clark, than lose under Phil Goff.
If they stay with Helen and destroy John Key, they may yet win. If they lose, at least they will preserve the left's iron grip on the Labour machine.
The left plays for the long term.
Demographics and society in general are moving their way.
If they have to let National in for a term or two to clean up and take the blame for their economic disasters, so be it.
Of course, some Labour MPs desperate to retain their seats may try something, but I will be very surprised if they can muster the numbers.
I think the next election will be fought between Clark and Key, but if only one leader survives up to that point, I'm betting it will be Clark.
posted by Trevor Loudon at
9/01/2007 09:27:00 AM
29 Comments:
Sorry to go off topic Trev but since there aren't any Iraq articles on at the moment I'll have to use this one to ask these questions of Mah, Reid of America, and Exocet:
"What about....." General Sir Mike Jackson (retired commander UK forces) saying that the State Department's post-invasion strategy planning, viz. the way out, was completely wasted because of Rumsfeld's ideological "article of faith" that invading forces would be greeted as liberators ? You know, garlands of roses in the streets of Baghdad......
That Rumsfeld's approach was "intellectual bankruptcy". That the WMD nonsense (is he saying "lies" ?) was always doubtful.....
And former UK Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind's observation that the combination of Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld has been "disastrous".....that without that combination a great number of US, UK, and Iraqi lives would not have been be lost ?
I do ask, especially of Mah, that responses are intelligible and do not amount to foaming accusations that these guys are stinking commies from whom such slander and "leftist lies" is entirely predictable.
The label "war criminal" doesn't seem so silly now, does it wise men ? Oh well, I guess Rumsfeld will be taking his vacations in Maine from now on.
How did America anger God so badly as to permit Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld to be visited upon her ? What pray tell did the world do to deserve it ?
Steve Northland says "What about....." General Sir Mike Jackson (retired commander UK forces) saying that the State Department's post-invasion strategy planning"
I'd say General Jackson is trying to deflect blame for the poor performance of British troops in southern Iraq. The British made a big deal of how they were doing operations in a kinder gentler way than the US. They were kinder and gentler and lost control. Instead of changing course and initiating a surge the UK is being pushed out.
The Kurds and Shia did welcome the US as liberators. The Sunni not so much.
The "results" for Iraqis of whatever stripe really do stamp your response as something like - "the earth is flat". Any Iraqis, whether Shia or Kurd or Sunni see liberators.....? Yeah.....Right !
Of course the armchair general tapping away at a keyboard in the security of the US would respond in this way - a surreal frame of mind where blood and humanity are way beyond the pale of consideration.
Because in classic US "destroy them to save them" style "their" blood and humanity doesn't actually matter. Congratulations on your contribution to the destruction of America Reid. A "civilisation" doomed by its own wealth (war cost $1.5 billion a day while Now Orleans festers), excess, and arrogance.
Thankfully however no off-the-wall "commie" rave.
Just one thing Reid - UK pushed out no - leaving yes.....such a fabulous coalition of the willing. On the other hand, maybe the Poms are just gutless surrender monkeys.....like those twice last century occupied French.
I go away for a while, then come back and nothing has changed.
I reckon life was rather pleasant under Saddam compared to whats happening now.
Back in the good old days before Bush decided to bring democracy the heathen.
Dirk..
"I reckon life was rather pleasant under Saddam compared to whats happening now."
And yet you have nothing to say about the Marsh Arabs? Saddam's friends in Hamas? Abu Nidal? Gasing the Kurds?
cant save all the whales Mah.
Dirk.
Foolish of you to mention the gassing of the Kurds Mah. We've been over this many times.....
The "intellectually bankrupt" Rumsfeld (and most people now say also the "morally bankrupt" Rumsfeld), well.....the war criminal went to Baghdad in '83 and '84 to sell the then much worse war criminal Saddam the helicopters and other armaments to do his evil - get this Mah, get this - KNOWING that Saddam was ALREADY gassing the Kurds !
You've seen the photographs - the cocktail party grimaces passing for smiles. Are you mad Mah ?
You think Rumsfeld was any better than the Butcher in that connection ? Well, obviously you do. That's what being a fanatic is all about I guess.
How about we do a little poll Mah ?
How many people think that the likes of Mah ("the white South African apartheid regime was 'simply' conservative".....), and Reid of America ("Palestinians are depraved losers....."), (1) ARE NOT fanatics and (2) DO NOT blacken the reputation of America, and (3) a similar "I think, therefore it is....." approach in the White House IS NOT a central reason for America's decline ?
And before anyone screams - in my book the prospect of an America where fanatics have sway, an America with a blackened reputation, and an America in rapid decline, is quite simply horrific. But America has done it to itself !
Cheered on by Mah and Reid and others of the ilk. Patriots indeed ! As patriotic as Bush who "chose" not to attend the Vietnam war, the losing war, which in truly surreal fashion he now touts as a reason to do it all again !
Enough of this anti-U.S./anti-Bush/anti-Cheney/anti-Rumsfeld bull already. All this exposes that you Steve and others DO NOT CARE about the Iraqis. You just care about protecting the previous regime of Saddam Hussein.
Have you ever criticized Ramsey Clark for being on a defense team for Saddam? He was responsible for organizing many rallies here in the U.S., but also elsewhere as well. But apparently, you certainly would likely worship him blindly like you have done with other modern Marxist-Soviet icons.
So you do care about the Iraqis ? Bugger off ! They're just fodder to people like you. For your war games, conducted on the Bremworth in some NY apartment.
Complete rubbish Mah of NY. Forget exactly what Ramsey Clark's role was in real life but he was intensely US Establishment, and he is (was, maybe he's dead) one of those international type lawyers who without any adverse reflection on them, do get instructed to act in hopeless cases.
He was probably a stooge anyway, put there to show how much we in the west are into "fair trial".
Rumsfeld's gonna need exactly one such in time. In some war criminal tribunal somewhere.
That's why the intellectual and moral bankrupt ain't gonna be holidaying anywhere other than Maine. Just in case he gets arrested like that murderous, dribbling old geriatric Pinochet got taken in while hobbling through London. Of course you loved Pinochet didn't you ? Well, he had a team of top QCs acting for him.
You better watch what you say Mah. You might get arrested as an accomplice after the fact. And then they'll discover you were there before the fact and it'll all get very nasty. Dragged screaming from your keyboard !
This comment has been removed by the author.
You know what Steve. Your so-called comments or should I say rantings are nothing more than a waste of space. Pardon me if that's the truth, but all your ramblings do is promote diversions away from the topic of the entry.
So Steve, what caused you to abandon "Zionism"?
Mah NY
cracks up laughing at Steves succinct comment.
Dirk
It's irresistible, gotta confess it Mah, but I'm a sucker for "told you so.....", and like you Mah - angry, angry, angry - 'what about this and what about that ???'.....".
Well here we go. That Republicana from Idaho, forget his name.....anti-gay, pillar of Republican righteousness - "Ar nevar hav' bin gay and I am nart gay !"
Excuse me !
In the 60s we all said, "Well, its the stiff upper lip and wherever else British who screw up on the sex side, and it's the Yanks who blow it with Mammon !"
My, how things have changed..... and delicious it is too ! Foley of Florida - congressional bell-hops and all that - even my "commie" mate William Jefferson although he wasn't nearly as daring as Messrs Senator Idaho and Foley. At least he restricted his misbehaviour to "crumpet" and to give him his due, he was never over-hard on those found with their pants down.....
And then only a few years ago that other guy, a virulently anti-gay congressman, who when busted doing boys pathetically pleaded an unusual felicity for pills and booze as the "reason" for it all.
Not to forget "Rush, Rush, Rush" Bimbaugh, the right-wing hero, him with the pills.
How those guys expect people to empathetically "understand" that they're humanly flawed and "please go easy on me....." ? Why ?
They made political careers and lots of money from "family values", defaming gays, hookers, and "commies" in the most viperish way. Republicana to a man almost !
Hypocrites, juggling their bibles in the air with their hands and other parts in places they "shouldn't" be !
Just like you Mah, and Reid - although I don't say in "that" way 'cos I don't know - but such "plans" for the rest of the world !
Ka Kite My Mates..... and apologies please to the people your heroes and you, I've no doubt, spewed bile on.
Steve, knock off your blathering. When have I ever rooted for Foley or Craig? You can't name a time can ya? All you do is promote blind anti-U.S./anti-Bush hatred.
You can't ever have a pleasant thought about your opposition, only to demonize, and bully them to a point to they are neutralized just like with Hillary Clinton and her problem with the "vast right-wing conspiracy". And when was the last time I rooted for Rush? I never listen to the man.
You like Hillary promote there is such a "vast right-wing conspiracy" but more likely a "vast right-wing U.S./Zionist conspiracy" that there's a "fascist conspiracy" on top of it. You spew mindless propaganda, and it seems you are the one who certainly has a problem with anyone who has a different opinion than yours so make sure you go about to try to neutralize the opposition in such a dishonest manner like what you're currently doing.
Please Steve. Everytime you keep on blathering about how Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld are "war criminals", America is the "Great Satan" under their rule, yada, yada, yada you don't even give a damn about a recent hacking into the Pentagon by allegedly the People's Liberation Army, the armed wing of the ruling Communist Party of China.
You see that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld or anyone similar in their position in the U.S. are the "greater threat" to your Orwellian "world peace" where if any nation that dares go against the so-called international community is suddenly painted on the lines of the National Socialist regime of Germany.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
please save us trevor from the red devils
How about the likes of U.S. intervention in the Bosnian War under Bill Clinton Steve. Would you call Clinton a "chickenhawk" on the same lines as Bush, at the same time during the Vietnam War, Clinton refused to do more than just be drafted in the military but organized anti-war rallies that ended up in supporting the victory of the Communist Vietnamese?
Apparently in your world Steve, only Bush could be a "chickenhawk" while someone like old Slick Willie who did more than just dodge the draft by aligning with America's enemies during that time period even traveled to Moscow during that time.
Also Steve, why do you think it's okay that you should support the likes of Hugo Chavez as your "hero" even when he just went to defend the Argentinean dictator who started the Falkland War just so that Chavez could use that dictator as a patsy for his "South American Union" and target British, U.S. navys?
Do you care that this Argentinean dictator that your boy Chavez just excused his authoritarianism was also linked to so-called CIA funded death squads? I guess it seems that Chavez supporters can stomach totalitarian/authoritarian leanings only when it suits their agenda. They hate America and the West more than they hate those sort of tyrants more.
Hard out on the "death squads" what Mah ?
Now let me go back only days ago. You calling the apartheid South African regime "simply conservative" when I mentioned "neo-nazis" and the "death squads" it financed and mobilised.....
Don't deny it now my little HN. That's what you said, while not actually denying their existence.
Get a life dishonest hypocrite.
There's more to it than that though isn't there Mah. Black is White and White is Black depending on whether you like the people being brutalised.
And don't give me your spittle about me loving this dictator or that one. I'm not like you thank God. I'm not a fanatic. You'd be a mass murderer if you had political power Mah.....Mahgabe The Chosen One !
Mah, re your post about six or seven above.
Damn it man.....I never said you rooted Foley or Craig.....or Rush Bimbaugh. I've got a private line you can call me on if you like.....you know, unburden a bit.
"Get a life dishonest hypocrite."
Says someone who spends time on a blog he disagrees with and harass anyone he opposes.
"Damn it man.....I never said you rooted Foley or Craig.....or Rush Bimbaugh. I've got a private line you can call me on if you like.....you know, unburden a bit."
Yea you did. Don't come around and harass me anymore.
You deserve harrassing Mah My Nasty Little Zionist. 'Cos you're a nasty, cruel wee man/woman whatever you M-ah.
Such plans for the rest of the world.....no matter that the subjects of your "schemes" may be required to let blood and lose their children in far away places.....no - what matters is that Mah's "plans" should be uncritially swallowed - otherise Mah Mah's being "bullied", weep weep !
Please.....
In your Zionist arrogance and "choseness" you hate the world and then get hoha when people say "Piss Off".
Why don't you stick to crazy US blog sites and massage the 7 or 8 other "chosen people" who "think" like you ?
Actually, why don't you get off your overworked board in NY and actually go to Israel. Put your mad arse in an illegal settlement 700 metres from The Wall.....no ? What ? They won't have you, notwithstanding Right of Return ?
Please Steve. Osama just parrotted the rhetoric of every far left type such as Noam Chomsky in a recent tape.
You are nothing more than a Useful Idiot for bin Laden. You don't care that by pulling out of Iraq, you are allowing bin Laden to retake Afghanistan. You blame Bush, Israel and anyone else who disagrees with you more than you blame bin Laden for the 9/11 attacks. Get it straight.
There are those who'd say that if you gotta be an idiot you might as well be "useful" to someone.
How come the maddos in the illegal settlements don't want ya My Mate ?
Too "unusual", even for those racists ?
Here's a little narrative metaphor Mahgabe, especially for you.
Strolling through Central Park the other day - packing heat of course, just in case I came across a Palestinian pre-schooler or a pimply, 13 year old commie.
Well, no such good luck. Damn ! Anyway, what I did encounter was this hand over heart bastard, yelling "Freedom, Freedom, Freedom". Violently raping this poor woman he was. I ran up, pulled out my firearm, pointed it at him, and yelled....."Stop raping that woman you pig !"
His response shocked me - "Piss off you commie - if I don't keep raping her someone else in the neighbourhood will - I'm doing this for her own protection, don't you understand that ? Anyway, stop 'bullying' me you socialist 'troglodyte'.....you can't "certainly" handle it when people do stuff you don't agree with, can you ?"
That's exactly what he said, I'm not kidding !
Well, needless to say, I shot the mongrel clean between the eyes !
The metaphor is explained like this Mahgabe:
For the woman, read Iraq, and Palestine.
For the rapist, read The Chickenhawk, and you (and Reid of America, and Exocet), since in imperious voice you're all cheerleaders for the rape.....
Still feel bullied Mahgabe, albeit by a bunch of mere words ? Imagine if you were the woman.....
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home