OK. Shearer is still leader of the Labour party (although clearly things were closer than his lieutenants would have wanted – no unanimous vote of approval). You can tell I have my reservations, but I’m going to step back and let him prove himself. Unfortunately, the compilation of polls over at Kiwiblog highlights that Labour has stagnated since he took over, but hey, the caucus know what they’re doing right? And if the Dom Post editorial states that:
He is desperately inarticulate, unable to deliver a sound bite without a lot of rehearsal or an auto-cue….Mr Shearer has a long way to go before he and his party look like winners….Trevor Mallard likens Mr Shearer to Norman Kirk, which is laughable. By 1972, Mr Kirk had become a poised and appealing politician. Unlike Mr Shearer, he was quick-witted and articulate, and thrived on hecklers….
well, we know the media like to build people up only to rip them down. But I guess we shouldn’t be surprised with this comment from the TransTasman [offline] that:
It’s not often Govt Ministers are happy at the outcome of a leadership vote in the Opposition. But the Labour caucus endorsement of David Shearer this week had one joking “shall we crack the champagne?
Yes, we’re going to give him the chance to prove that he can do it, but I’m thinking we’re not off to a good start.