6

David Cameron’s Strategic Nous

by Whaleoil on November 15, 2011

In May of this year Britain had a referendum on their electoral system. David Cameron took a very strong role in the referendum as he knew that under AV (the equivalent of PV), the Conservative Party would face a political environment that was dominated by Labour & Liberal Democrat coalitions.

Cameron made a very, very public plea for voters to reject AV.

John Key is more popular than David Cameron ever has been, and his intervention in this referendum will ensure a second referendum and a voting system that will not work against National. Cameron’s strategic nous meant that AV was defeated and Britain has an electoral system that the Conservatives can win under.

John Key should give a press conference doing what David Cameron did. Give voters clear reasons to reject MMP and vote for SM.

Tagged: • • • • • • • •

Related posts

  • Euan Rt

    I’m picking key will do similar closer to polling day – say 20th. Give less time for vigorous opposition.

  • Evan Johnson

    The problem for Key is that there is no clear reason for supporting SM, as evidenced by its ranking in opinion polls.  He weakly says he likes the “characteristics” better.  It is the FPP characteristics that he may like but others fear.  Characteristics like marginal seats, executive power, loss of proportionality, unbridled power, squashing of minor parties.

    Right now he is on the defensive.  I don’t see him sticking his chin out over this one.

  • Pingback: Will Key do a Cameron? | Kiwiblog

  • Guest

    John Key should give a press conference doing what David Cameron did. Give voters clear reasons to reject MMP and vote for SM.

    There was no need for a referendum anyway. He was on over 50%.  He should have just:
    a) run a proper anti corruption inquiry – deregistering Labour & most of the unions & jailing the leaders
    b) run an indicative referendum, and then switched back to FPP with geographical proportionality, a country quota, and a nett-taxpayer only franchise. 
    c) reformed the EFA so that there were no corporate limits on campaign contributions – except that Unions, and corrupt parties were unable to spend anything.

  • Catweasel321

    Welcome to the politics of neverendium..

  • MrV

    Don’t you think it’s basically the beginning of the end of democracy when a coalition of losers can get up every time in an election?