Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Phil speaks truth in shock interview
Contrary to media opinion, I'm happy to live in a country where incumbent governments aren't guaranteed to win 'elections'.
In fact, I believe there's a word for the kind of country where the return of the party in power is assured, and then regularly rake in, y'know, 99.8% of the popular vote.
Key, who apparently sees recognition of democracy as a sign of Cabinet disunity, can STFU too. Would he prefer Goff go around proclaiming "There's absolutely no way we can lose this election, because I've personally filled in all the ballots myself."
Because that's the alternative. Dickhead.
In fact, I believe there's a word for the kind of country where the return of the party in power is assured, and then regularly rake in, y'know, 99.8% of the popular vote.
Key, who apparently sees recognition of democracy as a sign of Cabinet disunity, can STFU too. Would he prefer Goff go around proclaiming "There's absolutely no way we can lose this election, because I've personally filled in all the ballots myself."
Because that's the alternative. Dickhead.
Labels: democracy, dickheads, john key, media
Comments:
I think the point the media was trying to make, albeit somewhat overstated, was that Goff's comments are not what you'd expect from a senior ranked cabinet minister in the build up to a budget and to an election campaign.
It's a convention in politics that, no matter how dire the situation, you don't entertain the possibility of defeat (unless you're the prime minister in which case you can say whatever the hell you like) as it just gives your opponents a stick to hit you with and removes the focus from whatever your political agenda happens to be.
The same rule applies to speculation on the leadership. No matter how obvious the case may seem when you're a senior cabinet minister you just don't go there. Again, you're giving the opposition leverage and detracting from your party's position.
Finally Goff's a canny politician and he knows all this stuff like the back of his hand. Normally he doesn't enter such territory. In fact when the leadership issue came up earlier this year he was emphatic in denying any aspirations. He hasn't been so here.
So on that basis I'd say it was worth reporting, although perhaps no to quite the extent that it was.
It's a convention in politics that, no matter how dire the situation, you don't entertain the possibility of defeat (unless you're the prime minister in which case you can say whatever the hell you like) as it just gives your opponents a stick to hit you with and removes the focus from whatever your political agenda happens to be.
The same rule applies to speculation on the leadership. No matter how obvious the case may seem when you're a senior cabinet minister you just don't go there. Again, you're giving the opposition leverage and detracting from your party's position.
Finally Goff's a canny politician and he knows all this stuff like the back of his hand. Normally he doesn't enter such territory. In fact when the leadership issue came up earlier this year he was emphatic in denying any aspirations. He hasn't been so here.
So on that basis I'd say it was worth reporting, although perhaps no to quite the extent that it was.
G'day Random ... I see what you're saying, but the "convention" is itself a creation of the media.
Sure, Goff could have (and perhaps should have) respected that "convention" but then it's a pretty sterile interview - also cause for media complaint.
Whichever of the main parties loses the election (or, at least, doesn't end up in Government!) is going to have a new leader. And in both cases absolutely everyone knows who has the inside running: Goff for Labour and English for National.
For the media to get hysterical when a politician alludes to this reality seems, frankly, pathetic.
Do you think politicians will be substantially less inclined to give relatively frank interviews as a result of this kind of carry-on?
Sure, Goff could have (and perhaps should have) respected that "convention" but then it's a pretty sterile interview - also cause for media complaint.
Whichever of the main parties loses the election (or, at least, doesn't end up in Government!) is going to have a new leader. And in both cases absolutely everyone knows who has the inside running: Goff for Labour and English for National.
For the media to get hysterical when a politician alludes to this reality seems, frankly, pathetic.
Do you think politicians will be substantially less inclined to give relatively frank interviews as a result of this kind of carry-on?
I'd say the convention is actually the creation of the politicians. Senior politicians are invariably very careful about what they say and do (though there are some notable exceptions) so when they act in a way that is outside of their normal practice it does gain attention.
As for the relatively frank interviews, they're far and few between. Politics these days is about "being on message" and "targeting key demographics". Straight answers are relatively rare ... listen to question time and see how politicians address a question without actually directly answering it and you'll see what I mean.
As for the relatively frank interviews, they're far and few between. Politics these days is about "being on message" and "targeting key demographics". Straight answers are relatively rare ... listen to question time and see how politicians address a question without actually directly answering it and you'll see what I mean.
Post a Comment