Embedded in an article (titled,
New Poll sees NZ First Surge to Become Third Most Popular Party) published by Stuff today, was a "Who is your preferred PM?" survey.
While the below are real-time results subject to change from moment to moment during its stay in the news cycle, the trends (if the survey is to be relied upon) look pretty clear:
Chris Hipkins 40%
Christopher Luxon 20%
Winston Peters 13%
Chlöe Swarbrick 12%
David Seymour 7%
As any regular reader of
The Customer & The Constituent knows, I study not only the political news coverage of the day, but also (even more so, in some instances), the accompanying readers' comments sections (where these are "allowed" by the various mainstream outlets, of course, which sometimes isn't often).
On the basis of what I read and the trends within those comments sections, and with a good slab of my own opinion thrown in, I want to tell you what I think is behind the above ratings rankings.
Here we go:
Chris Hipkins
For the most part, I think this is a country's desperate cry for help - because a Hipkins-led Labour Government would be the death knell for New Zealand's economy, even if that death blow hasn't already been dealt.
His on-screen appearance would indicate quite clearly that Hipkins is a weak little man with no sense of answerability for his part in the many COVID-related crimes, and a streak of arrogance to complete the very unhealthy picture.
BUT what he has on his side is that (with no immediate, viable successor) he's in the best default position to benefit from the extreme and growing levels of buyer remorse by those who voted in Christopher Luxon.
While Labour is generally seen as incompetent and fiscally irresponsible - and having been Covid Response Disaster Central - on the other hand, it's not seen nearly so much as the cold, cruel and financially self-serving band as is Luxon's Lot.
Christopher Luxon
There are some outstanding citizen journalists and associated YouTube channels and web-based publications popping up in New Zealand, post-"Covid" era.
Read the comments under any one of them and you will see a growing - and quite extreme - disinheriting of Luxon by those who voted him in. Descriptor words commonly used by commenters are "spineless", "lacking a backbone", and "looking after his rich / landlord mates". (Re the latter comment, see evidence
here,
here, here and
here, just by way of a few examples.) There's also a healthy cynicism about whether or not he was really the respected CEO his pre-election publicity mooted him as being.
Luxon's one show of (misplaced) "strength" was his appalling (and continued) swipe at the most vulnerable in New Zealand society, by taking aim at sectors like the disabled . . . which he topped off by causing mass unemployment through a variety of means, and then making the lives of those trying to recover from that, as painful and difficult as possible. And that, I believe, is where a lot of the country's broader electorate, looked back to Labour . . . for basic humanity (notwithstanding their Covid atrocities), not for any semblance or memory of competence.
Luxon surrounded himself with "strong women"
(that's what they call themselves; frankly I feel that, in most cases, Andrea Vance's descriptor was far more on-point), who tow him along by the nose, as they prop him up to run roughshod over "we, the people". Dismissing all concerns from multiple sectors for their intention to open the floodgates to genetic modification (and with no labelling requirements, worse still) is one leading example.
Winston Peters
I'm going to refrain from a long commentary on Peters - because my views are coloured. Here's why.
Arguably with his backbone, his high IQ and sharp mind, and his generally commonsense approach, he's the best-qualified to lead this country. So convinced of this - and so passionate about his election was I - that I reached out, multiple times, to offer my voluntary support to his team.
But that team was so rude, so arrogant, so insulting on the occasion of each of my numerous offers - that it coloured my views of the man himself.
I hope he reads this.
Chloe Swarbrick
Bloody hell.
David Seymour
On one hand, he talks a lot of sense. He's somewhat Peters-like in that regard.
On the other hand, his self-opinionated, ill-researched and narrow-minded arrogance is intolerable. Watch closely and you'll regularly witness him answer a reporter's question about (by way of example) the water fluoridation issue with his signature type of throw-away insult to a large section of New Zealand society: "The loonies have run the show for too long."
Not hard to see that he'd also take the "run roughshod" approach, given the broader opportunity.
His hypocrisy is, likewise, palpable. He was on Ryan Bridge's online segment last week, calling for Ardern to front up to the Covid inquiry to "face the music". It would serve him well to remember that he supported her approach, aggressively.
Lest he forget.
That's my two cents' worth, folks.
