Deliberate sabotage or stupidity?

Campaigning 101: a) stay on message. b) don’t take attention from the leader.

You could excuse Labour MPs for ignoring the first rule when the party hasn’t got much of a message to stay on. But flouting the second is either an act of deliberate sabotage or plain stupidity.

Which is it with Labour’s campaign manager who was silly enough to challenge Cameron Slater and backed-off when he didn’t like the counter-challenge.

Then in another desperate attempt to gain attention he does a tabloid blog post. (I’m not going to link to it, but here’s  Keeping Stock’s reaction.

Did Mallard fall on his head when he fell off his bike?

That might provide an explanation for what is bizarre behaviour for a senior MP but it’s no excuse for taking attention away from his leader who whichever poll you look at –   NZ Herald, TV3, TVNZ, –  needs all all the help he can get.

If he can’t depend on getting it from the party campaign manager who else is going to give it to him?

UPDATE: – Cameron has accepted the bike challenge without requiring acceptance of his counter-challenge.

What’s going to get more interest in the next couple of months – Labour’s leader or its campaign manager preparing for the challenge?

24 Responses to Deliberate sabotage or stupidity?

  1. pdm says:

    “Did Mallard fall on his head when he fell off his bike?”

    Probably a pity he didn’t – it might have knocked some sense into him.

    Like

  2. robertguyton says:

    Ele. Are you really applying you powers of thinking to this issue?
    Slater challlenged a man who has recently suffered a badly broken femur and shoulder-blade to a fight in a boxing ring. Supporters from the Right howled their displeasure when Mallard declined to step into the ring. Are you seriously not able to see the idiocy of Slaters challenge and those who clamour for violence against someone who has been regularly described by Slater as a cripple?
    What are you thinking???

    Like

  3. robertguyton says:

    pdm’s comment above typifies the violent expressions that flow so freely from Right wing commentators. Inv2’s blog draws them out into the light as well, like a poltise on pus.

    Like

  4. Inventory2 says:

    Once again Robert demonises the right, ignoring the fact that the supposedly seriously injured Mr Mallard issued the first challenge, whilst childishly calling Slater “blubber boy” on Labour’s official blog.

    Your faux outrage is hypocritical Robert, especially in light of your recent post about Hone giving Don Brash “the bash”. Take the log out of your own eye before you tell others to remove the specks from theirs.

    Like

  5. homepaddock says:

    Robert I don’t regard anything which aims to deliberately hurt another person as sport. I have no interest in boxing.

    Of course Mallard declined the counter-challenge but that’s not the point – it was the stupidity of making the original challenge. That’s definitely conduct unbecoming to a campaign manager.

    Like

  6. Inventory2 says:

    Here’s the link to Robert’s post

    http://robertguyton.blogspot.com/2011/05/hone-gives-brash-bash.html

    From whom do the “violent expressions that flow so freely” come again Robert?

    Like

  7. robertguyton says:

    Slater taunts Mallard, calling him a cripple. Mallard challenges Slater to a bicycle race to prove that 1. He’s not a cripple and 2. That he’s not frightened of a bully like Slater.
    Slater responds by daring the recently injured Mallard to fight him!!!
    There are none so blind as those who cannot see.
    Inv2 – being a snitch is not endearing.

    Like

  8. robertguyton says:

    Ele – why is it ‘stupidity’ for Mallard to challenge Slater to a cycle race?
    Seems very gentleman-like to me.
    Slater attacked Mallard publically.
    Mallard proposed a quite reasonable solution.
    Slater proposed a violent solution.
    Who’s conduct is ‘un-becoming’ here?

    Like

  9. Inventory2 says:

    You’ve overlooked one part again Robert – should one of the Oppositions most senior politicians (and Labour’s campaign manager) be calling people childish names on Labour’s official blog? Personally, I think that reflects very poorly on Mallard and on Labour. But you Robert have repeatedly refused to even respond on that issue. You’re either being obtuse, or you refuse to see fault on Mallard’s part.

    And as for the “being a snitch” bit; you started it at 8.27am

    Inv2′s blog draws them out into the light as well, like a poltise on pus.

    Hypocrisy much?

    Like

  10. Inventory2 says:

    Robert; it’s stupidity because Mallard has just been appointed as Labour’s campaign manager, and surely his sole focus should now be on getting Labour elected – God forbid. As an opponent of Labour, I’m more than happy to see his focus on petty spats in the blogosphere and on social media; have you seen all the raruraru between him and Clare Curran lately?

    Like

  11. homepaddock says:

    Robert @ 9.43 I2 @ 10.04 has answered your question.

    To reinforce his point: “Campaigning 101: a) stay on message. b) don’t take attention from the leader.”

    Mallard is taking attention away Labour’s campaign and leader. That’s sabotage,stupidity or both.

    MPS are attacked – verbally – by all sorts of people all the time. The wise don’t bother to engage with the attackers.

    Like

  12. robertguyton says:

    You may both be right that Mallard is managing the campaign badly. Of course, that might just be your blue-biased opinion but anyway, so what?
    He can do as he wishes.
    Slater, otoh, has attacked a politician and has been challenged for it. I like the idea of a ‘ride-off’. Mallard, unless his injuries are debilitating, should thrash Slater in a cycle-race. If the race goes ahead and if what I expect to happen, happens, it will be a great thing and will do Mallard’s profile no harm at all.
    I’d love to see Slater, and with him the aspirations of the Right, left panting in the wake of a fit, well trained and focused Lefty.
    Go Trevor!
    Inv2 – lighten up. I described your blog as the poultice, not the pus. You seem to react without thinking. Take a moment to reflect before you hammer away at the keys 🙂

    Like

  13. robertguyton says:

    Even funnier would be the sight of Slater, sweating like a pig, training on his g.a.y. bicycle in an effort to beat an accident victim, in a race, to save Righty-face!
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
    Oh Lordy! The very suggestion!

    Like

  14. Andrei says:

    I reckon Trevor Mallard is about the only heterosexual Labour MP there is.

    Nothing wrong with this challenge business, it’s all good fun – don’t hurt the Labour Party one bit.

    Like

  15. Inventory2 says:

    A straight question Robert; should MP’s call people by childish names in the public domain?

    Like

  16. robertguyton says:

    Key called the Opposition ‘muppets’ Inv2.
    Should he have done so?

    Like

  17. homepaddock says:

    Robert there’s a difference between an MP commenting on other MPs (and btw I don’t think Muppet at a group in general has the same force as invective directed at a non-mp in particular).

    But goNZofreakpower sums it up better than I can: http://gonzofreakpower.blogspot.com/2011/05/penguins-on-both-channels.html

    “Meantime, the political purist in me has died a little with the Whale v. Duck challenge. The battle of ideas has gone to the dogs.”

    Like

  18. Inventory2 says:

    Ah Robert; so many questions, and so few answers …

    Like

  19. robertguyton says:

    “The battle of ideas has gone to the dogs”
    Indeed Ele, yet you (and Inv2) devote posts to the dog-fight.
    Both you and Inv2 are non-plussed when John Key uses the childish term ‘muppets’ to describe the Opposition.
    How truly one-eyed you both are.

    Like

  20. Inventory2 says:

    Whilst you Robert seek to demonise John Key at every opportunity, even though he is not the subject of this post. How truly partisan you are. Whoever thought that the Labour Party would have a green cheerleader?

    Like

  21. Inventory2 says:

    Just imagine Robert’s outrage if John Key were to call someone “cancerous”, “corrosive”, a “scumbag” or a “rich prick”. Outrage would be understandable though if John Key was to call a known homosexual MP “Tinkerbell”, but he’s not likely to do that.

    Like

  22. robertguyton says:

    Demonise?
    I said ‘childish’.
    You’re sounding shrill Inv2.

    Like

  23. Inventory2 says:

    Pot; meet kettle 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: