Saturday, September 26, 2009

WHAT WILL BRADFORD'S DEPARTURE MEAN TO THE GREENS?


Love her or leave her, no-one could have ever been in any doubt as to where Bradford was coming from. So, what will her departure mean to the Green Party electorally?

Bradford never made any secret of the fact that she (and Locke) are on the left wing of the Greens.

I suspect that her advocacy on behalf of the unemployed and low wage workers probably won some of that constituency over to the Greens at the expense of the Progressives (and Labour). Whether they remain in the Greens fold is a moot point.

But I also suspect that her left wing militancy probably turned some voters off the Greens. My take on that Party is that they are the ultimate Chardonnay Socialists ... preferring to discuss the saving of the planet/whales/possums etc from the comfort of their living rooms while looking askance at the antics of the Bradfords of the world and treating them as you would an unwanted relative coming to stay.

So on balance her departure is probably a plus for the Greens. It makes voting for them a more respectable option for dissatisfied and unthinking voters looking for a home.

The Veteran picks the Green vote to go up.

6 comments:

muz said...

Not while Delahunty and Locke are there with their pro KIM, polpot, honecker etal philosophy that some in the media may give some exposure to.

Kevin said...

Was it 17 years floating around on the fringe of parliament? Achievement(s) were what? (Apart from scoring on travel perks for the future.)

The Veteran said...

Muz ... you can argue that certainly Delahunty and to an extent Locke do not have the public profile of Bradford.

Add to that the left/right balance in the Greens caucus will have shifted to the right. They may present as less threatening.

I stand by my analysis.

WAKE UP said...

Maybe she didn't jump, but was pushed.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Wake Up, I think you might be right. She has become an electoral liability.

Pablo said...

Veteran.

Good post and comment. It strikes me that Sue had too much of a class and social behavioralist line to be acceptable to the tree-huggers, who are looking to the mainstream to score political gains regarding 'easy" environmental issues like whales, climate change etc. The Greens have become a middle class Pakeha party rather than a working class and brown agent for radical change. Hence both you and Wake Up are correct--she had to go, whether it was by choice or force.

There is obvious blood-letting going on within the party, and the Clendon appointment shows that the soft, middle of the road environmental line is in the ascendant at the expense of the "red" line. The party may be getting both Greener and softer (at least in terms of moving to the middle and appeasing middle class sentiment).

In that light Keith needs to watch his back....