Saturday, 9 August 2008

Paranoia's not the problem - it's the reptiles that we should be worried about

I dutifully read Fran O'Sullivan this morning and thought well done. Well done indeed. It's given me the opportunity to fly the latest in my long line of conspiracy theories that I often keep under wraps, and both Bomber and Jafapete have only themselves to blame (points were deducted from Jafapete for hat-tipping to the Standard - loverly guys but this vid was a poor piece of propoganda).

Theory number one comes from people (like myself) who like the long game. I've had theories about how the Hon Bill English is one of these people - I won't bore you with the details, but the general gist is this. If you go back to the end of last year, Fran's wish-list for the top stories of 2008 holds this wee gem:
4. John Key and Bill English cut succession deal Key offers English a secret deal that he will step down as Prime Minister after two terms in favour of his Treasurer (English). The former currency trader recognises that English - who virtually single-handed ran the Electoral Finance Bill story that catapulted National back up the polls - deserves to succeed him. This assumes Key has read the lessons from the reigns of Tony Blair and John Howard about what happens to unity when talented finance supremos are left to fester for too long.

Lew will pooh-pooh me as he thinks Key is "It's a dog eat dog world and I've got bigger teeth than you," but I like to think of Fran in her Winebox days - if something smells fishy, that's probably because there's a snapper lying around.

Tenuous correlation number two came from reading the Armstrong-O'Sullivan combo, and isn't linked to the above at all. Yoda wrote:
National will know soon enough from its own private polling just how big a hit it has taken. Many people will wonder what all the fuss is about. Others will simply blame Labour for the dirty tricks. As a minimum, however, National can probably wave goodbye to securing a majority in its own right. (My emphasis)

Obviously, it was the last line that caught my attention.

I've got a bet with a few friends that ACT's going to ring in 6% of the vote. Seems obvious to me - you've got 5% of the population who are libertarian, neo-lib, and neo-con nutters, just like you've got 5% of the population who not only like Winston, but actually believe him too.

The issue is that 45% is not too much of a stretch for the Nats, and if you tack on ACT in a formal coalition you've got a prime opportunity to go back on any promises you made on the campaign trail ("we don't want to, it's Rodney's and Roger's fault"). Expediency is a wonderful thing.

This is only wild speculation on my part - I'm sure there are many minds that can rip this flight of fancy to pieces - but if our next Government (and even this pinko commie's coming around to a centre-right coalition) is blue and yellow, I'm looking forward to front row seats. I was too young for Lockwood's about-face last time and I wouldn't mind witnessing a repeat.


jafapete said...

Gee, thanks Paul, for the mention. I hat-tipped The Standard because that is where I saw the vid. Shouldn't I have?

Anyway, there was no way that ACT were going to get anywhere near 6% before the Peters saga came along and gave the man in the stupid yellow jacket a useful role to play.

When ACT announced the reincarnation of Roger I confidently predicted that ACT might double their ratings (up to 2%) at the most. I was right. This is because there probably isn't even 6% of the voting population that fall into the neo-lib and/or neocon nutbar category.

ACT will do well out of the Peters saga, but that's probably an unintended bonus for the people behind it. I'm not that much of a conspiracy theorist.

PS If you read my blog, perhaps it should be on your blogroll!

Paul McBeth said...

No worries Pete. You did right by tipping them - I saw it there too, but I do think it's another in the long line of unnecessary propoganda pieces that have been coming out from the lads. Looks like they've been picking up tips from Crosby/Textor.

Back to business - I've been tipping ACT to get 6% fo about five months back. Roger's return helped cement it for me (the Rogernomes were dancing in the capital's streets), but the Labour Lite Nats were the main reason - if something's looking certain, why not vote for what you really want to bypass those pesky election pomises? I'm just hoping they come through for me - there's a bottle of single malt riding on it (not to mention the old cannibalisation of the right vote that could come to save the day - fingers crossed).

(Just started reading your blog actually - but point duly noted. Now the two other people who read me will know how to find you.)


Lynn Prentice said...

I read you at least every couple of weeks.

Thoughtful posts and no daft phrases that get me irritated. Of course I disagree with much of your analysis - for instance 6% neo-lib/con voting for Act?

But I already know where to find Jafa...