Seymour, another failed ACT leader in the making?
I have met most of the leaders of ACT, apart from Richard Prebble and Don Brash.
I entertained Roger Douglas in my Corporate box at Eden Park in the mid 2000’s when he was really by then a fringe member of the party and more of a property speculator.
I met Rodney Hide at a business club meeting in Ellerslie where he presented his vision for ACT wearing his Synonymous yellow jacket. He was very charismatic and I wrote a letter aftwards congratulating him on his sales ability.
And I have met with Seymour on a number of occasions where is has either been campaigning at what was my local pub, and also in my capacity at Planet B Media to try and explain the dubious science that is Climate Change Emergencies and offer some policy advice.
ACT was created from the more right leaning Labour Party member Roger Douglas and ex National party member Derek Quigley. Both were very prominent members of their parties but left their respective parties with a bit of controversy.
Roger Douglas ushered in GST and made some of the biggest economic changes to the way New Zealand operates. He was accused of betraying the typical left leaning labour supporters with the changes he made, such as stopping subsidies, floating the NZ dollar, sold off state assets and removed many regulations. He was eventually sacked by David Lange for having further extreme ideas on the direction of New Zealand, particularly wanting to introduce a flat tax system. Something ACT still supports today.
Quigley was from the rival party National and was a supporter of free markets. Something NZ didn’t have until the late 80’s. He was very critical of Muldoon’s interventionism and was also sacked from his role as associate finance spokesman.
Quigley continued to criticise Muldoon and was asked to apologise or leave the National party. Quigley left and in 1993 he and Douglas started the ACT party with fellow ex Labour Party member Richard Prebble quickly replacing Douglas as leader. Prebble lead the party from 1996 until 2004 where he was replaced by Rodney Hide.
Prebble was closely aligned with Douglas’s economic reforms which earned him a public egging by an angry Labour supporter while he was still in the Labour Party.
With the exception of the current leader, Prebble has been the only leader of ACT to leave on his own terms when he retired after a pretty successful leadership of keeping ACT in the political sphere in all of the elections he participated in.
Rodney Hide took over the reins and was a very charismatic leader. Unfortunately being known as the Perk Buster, it was pretty difficult for him to carry on when in 2011 he got busted taking advantage of the very perks he was meant to be busting.
Don Brash took over from Hyde and only lasted six months. The combination of Brash’s lack of charisma and the Perk Busted moment of Hyde, reduced ACT to a single man band surviving in the Epsom electorate. Seymour took over and has lasted until this day.
Seymour survived on his quirkiness and the fact National favoured a deal in the Epsom electorate, as MMP usually required bedfellows no matter how odd they are, this deal suited National.
Seymour did very well reviving ACT from the one man band it had become under Brash, to getting enough of the vote to bring in a further 9 MP’s in the last election .
He gained some traction with his spirited questioning of Ardern in Question time, and with the onset of the COVID pandemic he came across as the voice of reason with the opposition to the draconian measures adopted by Labour.
ACT kept increasing in the polls and likely peaked at around 16% very recently largely due to the publics dislike for Judith Collins.
What we will now see is how his fan base reacts to two new realities. One, is the new leadership of Luxon who is seemingly rejuvenating National and who will likely increase Nationals share in the polls.
The other, is how vocal Seymour has become about getting the Pfizer jabs in everyone’s arms.
I have watched with a little curiosity since he posted on Facebook that he has done his research and is getting the vaccine. I don’t begrudge anyone opting for the vaccine but the fact he had done his research raised my eyebrows. I’m not sure he did more than ask his girlfriends permission but each to their own when it comes to vaccines was what he claimed. Well that’s what I thought.
Recently I see this so called fighter of freedoms has become slightly more arrogant in his belief around peoples choices.
This recent Facebook post surprises me, as the party that campaigns on less Government intervention, is now for clvaccine mandates and it seems he has totally bought in to the Governments fraudulent claims of the safety and efficacy of the vaccine.
Still willing to give Seymour the benefit of the doubt, mainly due to wanting Labour out more than anything, I then find his recent claims which proves why all senior members of parliament should have children.
This headline is where the support stops for me
Coronavirus: David Seymour says Govt should skip Medsafe process and approve vaccine for kids
I can forgive those that blindly follow the so called “science” we get dished up by politicians or highly political scientists like the evil Siouxsie Wiles and Shaun Hendy. Most don’t do their own research and rely on government officials and the media. But someone who should know better should not be pushing this sort of thing. and calling those that do do the research conspiracy theorists.
It is getting harder and harder for the powers that be to maintain credibility at these organisations like the WHO, the CDC and the FDA, who recently had two senior advisors retire over the very same thing as Seymour is pushing here which is get everyone jabbed. the senior advisory board members of the FDA retired over the pressure to authorise booster jabs, citing undue risk of harm.
This is of course a risk/reward decision and it’s not like it’s public knowledge that the jab poses more risk to 99.99% of children over any of the variants of the Corona virus.
This is the arrogance of justifying your own overzealous jump in the deep end of the jab uptake. It’s understandable that people defend their decisions to get the jab, but by then claiming everyone else should because you did is pathetic and not scientific.
Yes mRNA technology is great, but not if your risk is virtually zero of harm if you don’t.
The mRNA technology is helping fight cancer and autoimmune disorders. If you have cancer and the treatment may kill you, you work out the odds with your doctor. Survival chances leaving the lung cancer untreated or take an mRNA treatment with years and years of clinical trials.
That’s a little different decision to jabbing children willy nilly with a treatment that has undergone a fraction of the testing that virtually all other vaccines have gone through. Children are not at risk at a greater level than harm from the jab. The stats already tell us that.
10 years to get a vaccine to market, and the Pfizer was done in under 12 months. The BMA has exposed their dodgy trial antics and the adverse reaction list released by the FDA is pages longer than what was ever released to medsafe.
Doctors who speak out are sacked and the people like Seymour who was the voice of reason is now cheering from the front.
Most people hadn’t heard of myocarditis until 2021. Why is that exactly?
Life insurance payouts for those between 18 and 65 has gone up 40%, whilst the average age of death of the virus is 82 years old. why are young people dying 40 % more in 2021
Young athlete deaths has increased 500% in 2021
Here is the VAERS stats for kids
Did you do your research there David?
But the real kicker is how much of a fan David is of the mRNA technology.
He states that we should just leave those that are fans of mRNA technology alone and piss off with our theories. Have you heard of Dr Robert Malone David?
Here is the inventor of mRNA technology
Watch the video of Dr Mallone’s warning below.
So how much research have you done David.?
Perhaps you should do some and come back to us with your side of the story, as nothing I have seen suggests jabbing children with poorly tested experimental quasi gene therapy is a good idea. But we are all ears.
Until then enjoy the D on your forehead.