Goodfellow’s incompetent presidency results in National party suicide

The demise of the National Party in its current format is long overdue, and all we can hope for now is that recent events hasten badly needed reform.

This week’s sequence of catastrophes was set in motion Monday when Tova O’Brien interviewed Simon Bridges on his leadership aspirations. (see video below) Ms O’Brien has hated Judith Collins for a long time and led unceasing mainstream media attempts to undermine the Nat leader.

Mr Bridges knew a leadership challenge from the Luxon faction was imminent, and aware if he delayed with his own plans, Luxon would have the jump on him. In the interview Bridges did everything but openly declare his intent to challenge.

The Tova O’Brien interview with Simon Bridges, where without stating it directly, Simon made it
pretty clear
he intended to challenge for the leadership “before Christmas”. It was this interview
that enraged Judith Collins and led her to the rash response that precipitated her sacking.

When Ms Collins became aware of the interview, and as feminist politicians are want to do, she allowed her emotions to over-ride her good sense. She should have put Bridge’s act of subversion on the back burner and attacked the govt on its starkly undemocratic passing of the Covid 19 “traffic light” bill, basically a vicious attack by Jacinda Ardern on the civil and human rights our forefathers gave their lives to defend.

Instead Collins became further enraged when Bridges would not answer his phone, and issued a press release arbitrarily stripping him of his portfolios. Using as a pretext a complaint made against Bridges five years ago in an event that had already been addressed and settled at the time.

This rashness was the chance her adversaries had been waiting for. A caucus meeting was called where Collins was sacked and the leadership declared vacant until Tuesday.

Luxon had the highest vote in the Kiwiblog poll, but more prefer someone else

For those of us still waiting hopefully for some sign of change in National’s sad left wing trajectory, there’s little comfort on the immediate horizon. Polls on the preferred new leader for the Nats are extremely depressing. There’s really no one standing worth support, and this is shown to be true by the wide spread of votes.

Although Christopher Luxon appears to be the front runner, (supported by the discredited Todd Muller faction) numbers are so widely distributed there are far more against him then for him. It would be bizarre for the Nats to elect the extra-woke Luxon as leader when most center right parties have seen through this loathsome leftist deception and are fast moving away from it, but they will probably do it.

BFD commenters show a preference for Shane Reti, but the numbers are still scattered

Even more astounding is that only a few years ago, Luxon was hand picked by Ardern to lead the idiotic charade she called her Business Advisory Council. Simon Bridges had the good sense to scorn it at the time, and you can see him doing so in the video below. At the same time, Luxon is nodding vigorously in agreement with Ardern. How is it that the leader of this partisan farce is now the front runner for the National leadership? Just incredible.

Video shows Luxon and Ardern nodding along to each others meaningless waffle.
W
atch to the end for Simon Bridge’s accurate comments

Luxon has some media cred as a “businessman”, but he made a very wrong call in his alliance with Virgin Air, and the agreement disintegrated in disharmony and acrimony. It is whispered that Virgin’s boss, an experienced airline executive, regarded his NZ counterpart as an incompetent imposter.

Air NZ received a stack of woke awards for “diversity and inclusion” while Luxon was at the helm, including “rainbow tick” accreditation. He is a firm believer in the climate change scam, and presided over the conversion of all company cars to electric. (Electric cars are the ultimate in virtue signalling BS, and actually provide no overall environmental benefit. That Luxon doesn’t know this doesn’t say much for his intellect.)

Air NZ won numerous diversity, gender and inclusiveness awards while Luxon was at the helm of the company

When extreme left Alinsky disciple Barack Obama visited NZ and arranged intimate dinners at his exclusive Bay of Island’s resort stay, Luxon was one of the few chosen to attend.

Luxon was one of a very small number of NZers invited to an exclusive meal with the far left Marxist Obama when the ex-US President visited NZ.

To cap all this off, Luxon has also been supportive of the “build back better” or “great reset” concept as pushed by the hard left in their efforts to reform free pluralist western societies into one party socialist states uniformly acting in compliance with United Nations dictates.

Chris Luxon on Chinese (English language) TV where he praises Jacinda Ardern for her handling of the Covid19 issue, and agrees with the global left that recovery from Covid is a chance to “build back better”

Note: have posted the above video to my Youtube channel. Readers should feel free to link and distribute.

If Luxon wins, his choice for deputy will be gender rather than merit driven, and its likely to be Nicola Willis or (God forbid) Erica Stanford. Both unwittingly extreme left on the political spectrum and about as politically naïve as you can get. (featured in recent articles on this site. Willis here and Stanford here.)

Stanford in particular typifies National’s slide to the left as engineered by president Peter Goodfellow’s selection of completely unsatisfactory candidates. Once a reality TV producer, she is heavily committed to green politics, in particular cheering for brainwashed schoolkids to engage in school strikes for climate action.

She is good friends with the self confessed psychologically unstable Chloe Swarbrick, and leans so far left on most environmental issues (including rabid support for the charlatans of the Climate Change Commission) she should rather have joined the Green Party.

That Goodfellow chose her as candidate for East Coast Bays is why he should have been sacked. (He would have been if Judith Collins had not betrayed David Carter at the last minute when Carter challenged for the presidency).

Erica Stanford with good friends Chloe Swarbrick (list Red Greens) and Labour’s list Dutch born far left liberal Marja Lubeck

If successful, Luxon and his backers (who were responsible for the tragedy of Todd Muller) will hasten the demise of the National Party, and that’s probably not a bad thing considering what it has become. The real issue is that NZ will decline too, in an accelerating collapse into Venezuelan style chaos.

That’s democracy they say. Except it isn’t. NZ hasn’t been a democracy since the left took over the media and crippled its essential role of challenging the powerful and promoting a plurality of ideas and philosophies. This dysfunction is one reason for the demise of Sid Holland’s party, but the bigger problem by far is management’s connivance at the infiltration of National by wet weak liberals who would be far more suited to the Labour or Green parties.

Many National voters want Chris Bishop as leader or deputy leader, seen here eagerly
demonstrating his “progressive” credentials by dancing awkwardly in a Wellington gay parade.

12 comments

  • What a mess.

    Liked by 1 person

  • I didn’t partake in the BFD poll as there was no one I thought worthy or competent to be leader nor deputy. I concur, the stink in the Nats is coming from the rot at the top. A disaster for NZ voters, to have this current lot in govt unopposed. Act have lost all credibility with its mandate support. I was considering maybe a look at New Conservatives until I saw their recent promo. In no way, shape or form could they be considered serious contenders. So where to?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sharrylou- Yes, good question, and your comments on the New Conservatives are accurate too. Apparently some disgruntled Nat party members are talking about starting a new party called New Nation or some such. Don’t know much about it right now. Wait and see who is behind it.

      Like

      • Thanks Red. Just had a look at the Family First chart on how some Nat MPs voted on key issues. Interestingly Bridges was closest to my take on the issues, we only differ on euthanasia. So there you go, food for thought for me and I’m sure many, many others. I agree with other comments here too, re Bridges needing to show more strength as a possible leader, and strip out the lefty dissenters. If he does, who knows what may happen next election.

        Liked by 1 person

  • The party is done. I suspect we will see them a minority party to ACT before the election rolls around.

    Like

  • I suspect you’re right, Red. Of the current crop of candidates, I think either Bridges or Luxon are the two least-worst options. Luxon’s a wet – sold out to the climate scam and a slave of the rainbox jihad – but he has said he believes we should stop allowing the murder of the unborn, and indicated that if people want to live off the taxpayer, there should be some obligation in return (no-jab, no-dole for example. Irrespective of your view of the jab, I see that as an all-upside policy).

    However, I still think Bridges could be the least-bad option. If he learned the lessons from the Muller/Kaye betrayal, and goes scorched-earth on both the left of the party and the media, he could be a pretty good representative of a revival of the modern-day National party. It will all depend on whether he’s learned that lesson.

    Like

    • Family First have a good chart up today showing where the leadership candidates stand on social issues. It shows some stark differences.

      https://familyfirst.org.nz/2021/11/26/the-next-national-party-leader-where-do-they-stand-on-key-family-issues/

      National’s Climate Change spokesman Stuart Smith has a press release out today. It reads just like a Green Party press release. Despair.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Yeah, that dropped into my inbox yesterday. I think they’re being a bit soft on Luxon. He hasn’t been in parliament long enough to vote on several of the issues mentioned, but he’s certainly made plenty of public statements about them.

        The biggest disappointment is Mark Mitchell. A man with a great resume and a heap of potential, but a voting record not too far from Julie-Ann Genter. He’s my local MP, so he’ll be getting an earful at the next public meeting.

        Upshot is, if Bridges can demonstrate he’s learned the lesson from the great betrayal and is willing to go scorched-earth on his enemies both within the party and without, he could be a good leader. Or at least, not an abject failure like every other National Party leader since the 70s, with the one exception of Brash.

        Like

      • Here’s something that took me a little while to learn-

        I was pretty hard on Tony Abbot when he was Liberal (Australia) leader. Later I realised that Abbot as leader was constantly forced to arrive at compromises that suited the whole party. When he had traitors like Turnbull and many more, who sadly carried a lot of weight, it was difficult for him to present a consistent and coherent viewpoint on so many issues. I did not think of how hard it must have been for Abbot when his party was full of back stabbing traitors like Turnbull et al, and I regret that I judged Tony so harshly.

        The lesson is that the leader in many cases is constrained in what he/she can say by the consensus of the party. So if you have a party riven with dissent because they are not united on philosophy, its hard for the leader to represent the party and often difficult for them to be reasoned and consistent.

        This applies especially to the hopelessly disunited Nationals, who with so many liberals in the party do not have a clue what they stand for anymore, and cannot provide a united stance on almost any issue. So no matter who the leader is, its going to be difficult if not impossible for that leader to sound coherent.

        Before it can unite behind a coherent and strong leader, the party needs to get rid of those who do not understand its founding principles. (Especially those who do not acknowledge the existence of the culture war). Until this change happens, the party is not worth voting for, and IMHO it doesn’t much matter who the leader is.

        Liked by 3 people

  • Good stuff Reddy. No argument from me about anything you have said.
    Viking

    Liked by 1 person

  • O’Connor made some gutsy stances during the recent rushed legislative tyranny and Cheka laws being pushed by labour.

    All the Nationals that voted in Gay Marriage, are not conservative, more globo-homo corporate shills, fake. Serving the beast is not long term viable. They need to read their terms and conditions again. Serving deviant desires makes you a slave.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/gay-marriage-how-mps-voted/WLPKK4734FBZEKJIDHBFO4MWFA/?c_id=1&objectid=10878241

    Yes they should go back to founding principles. Re-establish morality and discipline. Key dragged the Nats into this directionless wasteland with his banker ethics.

    Liked by 1 person

  • I’m worried we will get 10 small right wing parties at next election and none getting the 5% threshold. It’s important for national to get destroyed but let’s not trash the nation at the same time.

    Like