In the Herald's vast poll churn that produces the chances of the current Government being re-elected at about 88%, is the real revelation that the Greens have been going backwards since the last election?
The trouble appears twofold;
1) The falls have been slow. Almost so small and slow you most probably didn’t notice them.
2) Chlöe is a media favourite, so no one is really scrutinising her as to whether she's any good.
Now, yes, Marama Davidson is a leader as well and I suppose you can blame her as much as you can Chlöe. But to my eye and mind it's Chlöe who is the head leader, despite their best PC intentions to spread the load, or blame.
She is also not in Government, so you tend to get, if not a free ride, certainly an easier one.
Now obviously I'm not a Green voter so none of this personally matters to me. But I'm all about continual improvement and the Greens are not on a path of any such thing.
Under Swarbrick they have drifted. They have not grown. They are not the environmental party they once were under Fitzsimons or Donald. They are essentially angry socialists who campaign for the homeless and downtrodden.
They are virtue signallers.
She came to prominence because she was young. She was possibly seen as the future.
To give her her dues, she has run a good ground game in Auckland Central and won her electorate and that may be her strength – a good local MP.
Because she is not a good leader.
If the Greens are to excel, they need to be better managed. Obviously, the Tana, Doyle, Kerekere, and Ghahraman shambles adds to the sense the place is a mess.
But it's all unfolded under Swarbrick. The good news is if they want to recognise it, they can fix it.
Certainly if this had all played out as part of a coalition you would have thought she would have been ejected a long time back.
Saving her partially of course is the lack of talent behind her. Do you honestly see Genter or Menendez-March as saviours, or yet more of the same ill-disciplined verbal rabble?
When you pare it back, look at the noise versus the outcomes and include the inescapable numbers, she has failed as a leader.
So is she a bit useless? Yes.
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings - where this article was sourced.
2) Chlöe is a media favourite, so no one is really scrutinising her as to whether she's any good.
Now, yes, Marama Davidson is a leader as well and I suppose you can blame her as much as you can Chlöe. But to my eye and mind it's Chlöe who is the head leader, despite their best PC intentions to spread the load, or blame.
She is also not in Government, so you tend to get, if not a free ride, certainly an easier one.
Now obviously I'm not a Green voter so none of this personally matters to me. But I'm all about continual improvement and the Greens are not on a path of any such thing.
Under Swarbrick they have drifted. They have not grown. They are not the environmental party they once were under Fitzsimons or Donald. They are essentially angry socialists who campaign for the homeless and downtrodden.
They are virtue signallers.
She came to prominence because she was young. She was possibly seen as the future.
To give her her dues, she has run a good ground game in Auckland Central and won her electorate and that may be her strength – a good local MP.
Because she is not a good leader.
If the Greens are to excel, they need to be better managed. Obviously, the Tana, Doyle, Kerekere, and Ghahraman shambles adds to the sense the place is a mess.
But it's all unfolded under Swarbrick. The good news is if they want to recognise it, they can fix it.
Certainly if this had all played out as part of a coalition you would have thought she would have been ejected a long time back.
Saving her partially of course is the lack of talent behind her. Do you honestly see Genter or Menendez-March as saviours, or yet more of the same ill-disciplined verbal rabble?
When you pare it back, look at the noise versus the outcomes and include the inescapable numbers, she has failed as a leader.
So is she a bit useless? Yes.
Mike Hosking is a New Zealand television and radio broadcaster. He currently hosts The Mike Hosking Breakfast show on NewstalkZB on weekday mornings - where this article was sourced.
16 comments:
Yeah can you believe Chloe has lead the country to massive unemployment, particularly youth unemployment? And siphoned off millions to property elite and tobacco companies? She must be voted out of government at the next election.
Mike you are a great guy, a smart man,a voice of reason in the far left biased media cartel.
So why has it taken you this long to work out that swarbrick is useless?
Greens today serve a purpose. Take a look at the lineup of their people, past, present and the latest announced one. The percentage of the vote they get shows quite clearly the percentage of NZers that could be classified as idiots
Mike I have seen youtube podcasts where chloe literally spells out her communist agenda clearly for all to see. In the comments kiwis say how much they admire her. When you ask them what part of her policy they like, they respond with another comment saying that it's not her policies so much, but what she stands for as a person. They admire her as a person. These people are deluded but they will be voting.
Wikipedia reports that "Swarbrick has a history of depression and anxiety. Swarbrick sees a psychologist weekly and is on anti-depressants."
How sad, But not nearly as sad as it would be if she ever got any real political power and most of us would be suffering from depression and anxiety and wolfing down anti-depressants as our country implodes.
Barend the country is imploding as we speak, and Chloe is nowhere near power. Shall you pivot the goalposts to “imploding even more than it already is”? I can lend you a digger and some cheap imported manual labour I got from this FTA.
Anon 911, I stand corrected! :-))
Chloe is not the problem. That firmly is in the hands of the misguided voters in Auckland Central - isn't it?
Anon 7:18 you conveniently forgot to mention the billions siphon off by part-maori elite.
Calling someone “useless” is not constructive and, unfortunately, here in New Zealand we have become more and more unkind to each other in public. Just look at what we do to each other on social media.
Like many others, I have followed Chloe over several years and listened to her in Parliament many times. While I disagree with her and her party on certain issues, I find myself agreeing with her and her party on others. Whether or not we support her and her party in general terms, can we acknowledge her commitment and spirit and, indeed, the quiet but determined leadership of Marama Davidson? Both are articulate and fearless in presenting their views which are heartfelt and genuine.
We may or may not agree with them on various social issues, on how to run the economy, on tax policy or on climate change and the environment. But they do remind us of the need for social justice and equality and they further remind us of the need to protect our environment over the long term, both for our children and their children, but also because it is the morally correct thing to do.
We can applaud their conscience in relation to our natural environment without necessarily agreeing with the full extent of their opposition to mining, for example.
Each and every party in New Zealand has something positive to add to the debate and ultimately to our society, though we may disagree in general terms with most of them on most issues. We need Chloe and others like her to keep a kind of balance in our political discourse.
David Lillis
Probably half (?) of all young people, young middle- or upper-class women mostly, on anti-depressants. So, young women in particular want to vote for a peer....
hardly THE problem as she is not important enough for that - but certainly A problem, particularly amongst women i think.
David Lillis - Get a grip. Calling her useless is being quite kind imo.
I too have listened to her and she has no substance at all. Her social policies (communist) and her race based equity policies are very very dangerous. She surrounds herself with undesirables - Bussy Doyle, who can forget him, Tana, migrant exploitation, Garahaman - the thief, Davidson - only white men commit violence....it's a great party the greens -clearly they have you interested. Chloe chanting her genocidal 'from the river to the sea' through parliament Swarbrick is the leader of these despicable rats.
David LILLIS you are 'welcome to acknowledge her commitment and spirit' as you put it.
You clearly do not know the difference between EQUITY and EQUALITY. The greens want equity - not equality as you state. Stop trying to fool us.
Fair comment, David Lillis
Really David, di you really think that she has the best interests of every NZer at the top of her agenda ?
Or even the 10% who might vote for her ????
David is onto it. So glad to see such a well reasoned take. More Davids, please!
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.