Armstrong’s pegged it right: ¬†the War Room won’t be so much used to take down the National Party instead of causing a severe amount of collateral damage to their own side
Having turned its caucus room in Parliament Buildings into a war room staffed almost around the clock by policy wonks, political strategists, experts in social media, plus assorted press secretaries – all in readiness for the coming general election – the Labour Party may find itself with another war on its hands before then. Or something close to it.
The “enemy” on this occasion will not be National. Neither will it be Act. Nor United Future. Nor Colin Craig’s Conservatives. Nor even Kim Dotcom and his Internet Party.
No, this war will be of the internecine variety where the combatants all come from the same neck of the (political) woods.
It will have been sparked by the seemingly endless positioning and posturing ahead of September’s election which will count for little in the aftermath. But this week it all turned ugly for the Greens. And things may yet get uglier still.
It may be that fate has decreed that the power struggle between Labour and the Greens takes centre stage at the worst possible time for the centre-left.
It may not come to open warfare. But the dismissive, almost contemptuous attitude displayed by David Cunliffe with regard to a supposed ally is bound to rankle deeply wherever Green Party members gather.
You can be assured there will be a response; that there will no longer be any scruples about upstaging Labour on the hustings.
Labour are not so much in a war mongering mind set as they are in a siege mindset. ¬†This is all about survival of those at the bottom of the party list.
David Cunliffe and his “strategists” know that a friendly face towards the Greens before the election will result in job losses for Labour, and increased power for the Greens.
If you were in Cunliffe’s shoes, what would you do? ¬†Maybe get a chance to take down National as an equal coalition partner, or preserve your own power base as best you can? ¬† Read more »