Jump to content

Aussies LXIV - Invasion Day Edition


The Winged Shadow

Recommended Posts

Yeah, this isn't the end. Just from what I have observed. It doesn't seem like Abbott is learning anything. Or capable of change. Just going by his actions from the moment he got in. To the public addresses he has given. (Especially since the heat has been turned up on him.) Each one has the aura of listen to me and fall in to line. "Captain's Call". You voted for me, deal with it. Over - "I'm listening. This is how we will proceed, together."


On a personal level. The fact that he has a gay sister and yet still maintains a hard line against the LGBTIQ community. That to me says he is not able to see or accept anything beyond his own mindset. And it's really sad. It doesn't give much hope for the Australian people that Tony would in any way empathise with their needs. When he can't give the slightest bit of grace to his own sister.



The man has said some things that have come off racist and sexist. First day on the job. Makes himself minister for Indigenous affairs and minister for women. That is a horrific start. (In my opinion) And has not gotten better from there.


The Knighthood incident reinforces how completely out of touch he is.



I know I wouldn't want the job of PM. I don't envy him the job or by any means think I could do a better job.


But Mr Abbott has been the bull in the china shop. Without recognition. Let alone remorse. The Bull is bound to be put down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only is this not the end, it doesn't really solve anything. The thing about attempts to roll the leader is that if they fail, you're left with a lose-lose situation, since the leader looks weakened and his colleagues look disunited. Successfully rolling the leader at least puts the issue to rest, in the short-term anyway.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not only is this not the end, it doesn't really solve anything. The thing about attempts to roll the leader is that if they fail, you're left with a lose-lose situation, since the leader looks weakened and his colleagues look disunited. Successfully rolling the leader at least puts the issue to rest, in the short-term anyway.

Many Abbott backers seem decidedly unwilling to reason this through. Maybe the coming months will clarify matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the election was held today, on the results of the polls out there, he probably would. But if Turnbull gets a chance to be the face of the election campaign then probably not.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to think it would go the other way.



A short time in the leadership and Turnbull would charm a lot of people into voting for him.



The longer he is there the more time he has to show that other than being a whole lot smarter than Abbott the policies won't be all that much different.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to think it would go the other way.

A short time in the leadership and Turnbull would charm a lot of people into voting for him.

The longer he is there the more time he has to show that other than being a whole lot smarter than Abbott the policies won't be all that much different.

Yeah this is what I meant. Give Turnbull the leadership for the election lead-up - only (say) six weeks and he would likely win with a reduced margin.

Unless the Libs keep cocking it up in the meantime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah this is what I meant. Give Turnbull the leadership for the election lead-up - only (say) six weeks and he would likely win with a reduced margin.

Unless the Libs keep cocking it up in the meantime.

Ahh sorry misunderstood :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there something about the structure of the Australian political system which makes parties throwing out their leaders more likely or is it just the current trend?

It's fairly entertaining to watch from the outside but it seems a bit odd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there something about the structure of the Australian political system which makes parties throwing out their leaders more likely or is it just the current trend?

It's fairly entertaining to watch from the outside but it seems a bit odd.

There's nothing historically significant in the system, but it is becoming a modern trend.

Labor has a number of factions in Australia - from right to left on the spectrum - and Rudd was a compromise leader as he was a member of neither. He was picked as someone who could win the election on the strength of his personal popularity at the time and once he had done that he became surplus to requirements for the factions.

Abbott was one of the senior Tories at the time of the last election but, frankly, a right-leaning donkey could have won at the last election. This mob then took that as a mandate to tear up reforms in place for a long time and start forcing their (very) unpopular ideological views on to the populace. Abbott has been proven to be a lying liar that lies (on numerous occasions) and the recent panic was over the results of the State election in Queensland only a week or so ago. The Tories lost there after just one term - despite holding a ridiculous majority going into the election - and Abbott was seen as the scapegoat by the Tories' base.

So not something that has been done regularly, but it is a worrying trend, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know. Stubby's totally right that it's not a historical feature of the Australian political system, but I do wonder if there's something about the way our system interacts with the 24 hour news cycle which makes it particularly prone to these sorts of episodes. The system hasn't changed much, but the environment in which it functions has changed dramatically in the last ten years or so... how long since we had a PM sit their full term, again? Eight years?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, historically Australia hasn't been eager to knife any sitting leaders (opposition is another matter though). It's been more of a recent phenomenon.



The 24 hour news cycle definitely has something to do with it, and the short federal government election cycle (every three years) only feeds it. It seems like winning the next election is always the focus of the party rather than the governing; Abbott has only been in for a year and already people are talking about who will win the next election.



Generally it seems like governments around the world seem a lot less stable. But I would hate to see Australia descend into the Italian or Japanese mould where they seem to change PMs every year or two at best.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone did the numbers and over the last 8 years we're as bad as Italy (4), better than Japan (6) and far better than Chelsea (8).

I think the problem is that the major parties aren't really sure what to do after the 80s reforms, and they don't know how to connect with the public.

Rudd had a connection with the public but his way of doing politics infuriated his party -sometimes with good reason but broadly his centrism was irreconcilable with the party chieftains. They ditched him for Gillard, who talked endlessly about Labor values to a bored and hostile public.

Abbott is a similar case to Gillard - arising through a clash between a modernising centrist leader the party old guard. His politics are beloved of about a quarter of the electorate and half the Liberal Party but everyone else finds them heartless and plain weird.

The pundit class talks about messaging, but people generally don't like the substance of policy these days either, which seems perennially geared towards slashing things and more competition for those who haven't grabbed themselves a few tax lurks or a retail duopoly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...