Is Mallard the man?

In all the talk about whether Parker or Cunliffe would do better than Goff at the election, I wonder if people are overlooking the merits of . I’m not saying Trevor could beat John Key and become Prime Minister, but he could well get a good enough result that Labour are within closer striking distance for next time. What are the advantages of Mallard:

  1. Mallard is clearly from the left and shore up their base. National in 2002 tried to got for the centre vote, had not shored up its base, and crumbled. In 2005 it moved to the right and got its base on board, and then won in 2008 by being back to the centre. You need your base first.
  2. Mallard would excite the activists. I don’t think it is a stretch to say that Mallard probably personally knows 90% of Labour’s activists – the ones who do the work. Trevor as leader would make sure that the entire activist base is motivated and working. Under Goff, they are dis-spirited.
  3. Mallard would please the unions. Mallard is massively pro-union. Donations and “manpower” would flow in from the unions with Mallard as Leader.
  4. Trevor appeals to Chris Trotter’s “Waitakere Man”. Labour has a masisve problem with male voters, and Trevor would lift Labour’s vote amongst men.

I’m not saying Trevor is challenging – of course he is not. What I’m saying is that if Goff goes, Labour should look further than just Parker and Cunliffe.

Comments (49)

Login to comment or vote