The reduction of power of NZF and Act is a major win in my book.
Even if Nat/NZF/Act get back in, having a new party to reduce their influence is great.
Opportunity has said that they will release their bottom lines this month. So it will be very interesting to see where they will conflict with NZF and Act.
The more I think about it, the more I think Luxon’s lack of political experience is a problem for National. And perhaps their advisors aren’t so good either.
Ruling out working with Opportunity based on one policy he doesn’t like shows a complete lack of understanding of how a multi-party government works. Say you won’t agree to the land tax but will try to find common ground in another area?
I get he was trying to stop National voters from going for Opportunity in the hope of a National/Opportunity party, but it still seemed like the wrong call.
Oh definitely, the guy wields so much more power than his chunk of the vote should give him, because he can play either side off against the other.
Which is why Opportunity say they’re willing to work with either party. They don’t want to be like the Greens, who aren’t really taken seriously because Labour knows they aren’t going anywhere else.
Yeah Opportunity fall under the Radical centrism umbrella, which that wikipedia page actually has them listed. It’s basically what you said, they have big ideas (radical) but are very pragmatic, will work with anyone (centrism) to move things in the right direction. This is opposed to the idealists Greens or Act which stand on their side so don’t get as many opportunities to progress any of their policies.
I would be so happy to have Winnie no longer the kingmaker.
The reduction of power of NZF and Act is a major win in my book.
Even if Nat/NZF/Act get back in, having a new party to reduce their influence is great.
Opportunity has said that they will release their bottom lines this month. So it will be very interesting to see where they will conflict with NZF and Act.
The more I think about it, the more I think Luxon’s lack of political experience is a problem for National. And perhaps their advisors aren’t so good either.
Ruling out working with Opportunity based on one policy he doesn’t like shows a complete lack of understanding of how a multi-party government works. Say you won’t agree to the land tax but will try to find common ground in another area?
I get he was trying to stop National voters from going for Opportunity in the hope of a National/Opportunity party, but it still seemed like the wrong call.
It was stupid.
Given the polling at the time, neither side had enough to govern without opportunity. It is even worse now.
Ruling out opportunity, effectively ruled out being in government.
I hope you’re right 😅
Luxon thinks he’s CEO of
AirNew Zealand.He’s been played like a fiddle by Peters and Seymour, who are actually experienced politicians.
Yeah for sure. You could smell the change in those two as soon as it was election year.
Oh definitely, the guy wields so much more power than his chunk of the vote should give him, because he can play either side off against the other.
Which is why Opportunity say they’re willing to work with either party. They don’t want to be like the Greens, who aren’t really taken seriously because Labour knows they aren’t going anywhere else.
Yeah Opportunity fall under the Radical centrism umbrella, which that wikipedia page actually has them listed. It’s basically what you said, they have big ideas (radical) but are very pragmatic, will work with anyone (centrism) to move things in the right direction. This is opposed to the idealists Greens or Act which stand on their side so don’t get as many opportunities to progress any of their policies.