NZ National Party Backstabbers- who are they?

Nats claim the matter of who voted for Bridges and who voted for Muller is a caucus issue and the voters do not deserve to know. That’s too cute. Voters should know if their representatives can be trusted to be loyal to the leader, or not. It says a lot about an MP if they’re ready to back stab their leader simply as a result of very aberrant polling. We are voters, and we deserve, almost have a right, to know this information. Before we cast our vote in the coming election.

Why is it important this time? Because it is now clear that for sometime, perhaps a year or even more, there has been an ongoing campaign within the Nats to unseat Simon Bridges as leader, including numerous leaks to hostile forces in the media. This kind of betrayal needs to be exposed, and those behind it should not be rewarded with high ranking places, but expelled (by the board) from the party.

So this post exist for the purpose of finding out this information, that the Nats want to keep secret. To be fair, although many of the backstabbers have been identified by public statements and other means there is still considerable speculation in this exercise. However, no one has been branded without there being at least some reason to believe the label is earned.

How many voted which way? There are two reasonably believable claims on this. One says the vote was 28 for Muller, 27 for Bridges. Another says the vote was 30 for Muller and 25 for Bridges. Its hard to say which is correct, although reason would suggest the 30/25 vote was more likely.

As of posting (26/05/20) there are 28 MPs in the backstabber list, and 15 in the loyal soldier list. This gives 43 votes we surmise we know and 12 as unknown. At the most, if reports concerning the majority vote of 30 are true, 2 of remaining 12 would be backstabbers, leaving 10 as loyal soldiers. Its a pity we can’t at least identify those unknown loyal soldiers. (Very sorry to see Matt King voted for Muller. Hope this is wrong,)

So the mission is to identify the missing backstabbers, and if necessary, adjust the current list to make it more accurate. Its just possible that some have been incorrectly identified, and if you’re an MP, or someone who knows for certain that someone is mistakenly named, please advise in the comments and the necessary adjustments will be made. If you have inside knowledge on the coup, please contact redbaiternz at inbox dot lv Full confidence is assured.

Post updated 04/06/20 to move Paul Goldsmith from Loyal Soldier to Backstabber category. Led Simon Bridges to believe he would vote for him, and then changed sides at the last minute. Worst kind of betrayal, and has radically altered my opinion of Goldsmith. Now have 29 MPs who voted for Muller, and 14 who voted for Simon Bridges. Still 12 unknown.

Post updated 07/06/20 Michael Woodhouse identified as final of 30 backstabbers. Moved from loyal soldier on confidential advice received over the last few days. This gives the 30 as some sources reported who voted for Muller, and leaves 25 supporting Bridges. Please note that if anyone has any firm information that could lead to a change of category, then please advise in the comments section. All information will be given full consideration and of course be completely confidential. Remember these faces when you cast your vote.

The Backstabbers & Loyal Soldiers Identified


6 thoughts on “NZ National Party Backstabbers- who are they?

  1. Red, I am not sure how you define backstabbers. I know how I do. I say those who leaked to the media backstabbers. A coup without that is in my view acceptable. Some of those listed would be leakers but I doubt is all were. Muller was aiming to be Leader but not till after the election if National lost. What happened was some low life MPs feared they would would be out of Parliament and panicked and leaked to the media which brought Simon’s personal and National Party polls down.


    • Sorry Chuck do not get your point. Here’s the bottom line. Conservatives are now in a completely lose lose situation. IMHO Simon Bridges had a good chance of winning the election, and he’s a conservative, and after winning, he could have gone on to set up a reasonably acceptable Conservative govt.

      That chance is gone. Because of leaks to the media over a two year period designed to destabilize Bridge’s leadership. From Amy Adams, Nikki Kaye and friends like Nicola Willis and Chris Bishop. These arseholes saw the chance offered by the aberrant polling, and took the leadership from Bridges.

      They’ll lose the election. Nothing surer. They’re incompetent leftist fools, and they’ve already demonstrated just how incompetent in a mere couple of days. So we’ve now got a liberal National Party led by incompetent jerks that is certain to lose the election.

      How can any thinking person see any kind of positive in what has happened?


      • I do not consider that National had 28+ backstabbers. It is acceptable in National to for anyone to challenge the Leader. However, it is not acceptable to leak to the media to undermine the Leader.

        On the chances of Simon having a good chance of winning I disagree. I think he had a slim chance of winning. However, I think Muller has a very remote chance of winning.

        Check the betting sites in Oz and this will support this. One could get 20 cents on the dollars better for Labour with Bridges as Leader. Under Muller this dropped to 12 cents. This is on SportsBet.


  2. The voters do deserve to know which leader the MP’s voted for, especially the voters of a given electorate with respect to their own MP.
    It is fair to say that an MP who stabs a leader in the back will stab a voter in the back and I would like the reader/voter to think about that.
    Every time an asset is sold off shore we are stabbed in the back.
    Franco once said: A leader who cheats on his wife will cheat on his people.
    We have scumbag MP’s and we should know who they are.
    They need never have taken the guns.
    The voter is also entitled to know how the royalty on NZ oil is created and how much NZ receives. Or to put it another way to know how much NZ is being fleeced/looted.
    Clue. The royalty is based on the well head price and it aint much.


    • Its starting to become clear. While the actual number of who voted for Muller is reasonably certain at thirty, I cannot fully classify the remaining yellow question marks until I have that thirty. Even though I am reasonably sure that most of them voted for Simon Bridges. Ian McKelvie for example. Fairly sure he voted for Simon, but feel it is better to wait until I have the full thirty before making it final. At the moment, I’m thinking the 30th vote was Woodhouse. Which means everyone remaining voted for Bridges, but so far, I haven’t got anything to convince me it was Woodhouse. So the diagram stays as it is until I get that 30th vote.


Comments are closed.