Coalition victory how?

[DaRick]

True but you're just repeating what everyone knows. And they vote coalition out of self interest. Which is fine everyone does. Just don't see what those who are homeless, sick etc owe this country anymore.

Well not everyone does, hence false consciousness.

 

[Run n Spread]

Well not everyone does, hence false consciousness.

Majority do is what I meant. (As in rest of population).

 

[Rotayjay]

Also another thing that may have backfired: the promise to directly subsidise the wages of child care workers.

I think they are terribly underpaid for the qualifications they have and the work they do (there is a lot of education paperwork behind the scenes and it is indeed an early education role today, not just wiping boogies).

Rather than invoking sympathy and pro-women sentiment, perhaps non-child care worker voters thought 'Jeez I wish the government would step in and give me a 20% pay rise! Why only them?'

 

[Borisdog]

Did you know that if you ate a can of cat food and then crapped it out, however many hours later, you could eat whatever was still undigested and save more money?

Pleb mentality my friend. Banks admitted what they did was for greed. Nothing else.

Well there's a shock - banks are greedy.

I did something to change my circumstances instead of crying about them. And I didn't have to get into the Whiskas to do it.

Pal OTOH...……..

 

[M Malice]

 

[Boxhead_31]

It wouldn’t be that great of a move to have all of the people who can’t afford to buy a house move to the country.

Why do you think there is cheap housing in the country?
It’s because there are no well paying jobs nor services out here

 

[Run n Spread]

I've seen a great many elections and I have undertaken formal Australian Political History studies and one can come up with a multitude of reasons why the election result came out as it did and yes, many of those reasons are contributory but history will tell you that in Australia, Governments change because enough people find a reason to change their vote hence the incumbent government loses it's majority.

The important thing to realise, is that people need a reason to change their vote from the incumbent Government and the clue as to what role the "Oposition" plays in convincing the electorate to change their vote at election time is in the title, "Opposition".

The focus, the glare of the electorate must be fixed almost exclusively on the Government and the role of the Opposition, is to remind the electorate just what the preceding 3 years or so have been like under the current Government because as another fellow poster put it, the electorate are focused on doing their normal day-to-day thing, trying to make ends meet, doing all the things they are responsible for and whatever Governments do, they see and hear about it alright but next day, they are still doing what they have to do and given that in this era of mass information, things don't linger around as long as they used to before the internet, before smart phones and yesterday's news is not spoken about and quickly forgotten and that's where the Opposition come in. In the past, before the technological revolution, things stayed in the minds of the electorate longer but in this day and age, the referral of Government's failures must be much more forceful at in greater frequency because today's news is forgotten very, very quickly.

The Opposition need; must be a thorn in the side of the Government reminding the electorate of the painfull, the untoward, the scandal, the ineptitude, all the things that a Government may have done during their tenure to remind the normal, everyday person of the anger and resentment they felt when the Government had disgraced itself or inflicted upon the electorate harsh treatment.

In Australia, Government's have either their commissions withdrawn or extended by the electorate and if they are to be rejected, there has to be a reason and if an Opposition chooses to ignore and not draw attention to the Government's failings but instead, put forward their own substantial economic manifesto, then they do not understand the Australian electorate or indeed, the stratagem required to topple a government.

2019 is a mirror image of 1993 and as noble a gesture it is to release reams and reams of economic policy, elections aren't won by being "noble". Another political imperative that has stood the test of time is, "if you see a head, kick it" and as unpalatable and base as all this may seem, this is the reality of politics and the ALP have failed miserably at the art of politics this time 'round.

Whether it was arrogance or overconfidence, the ALP should have known better especially considering that they saved their Government in 1993 because of the stupidity of Liberal/National party's Fightback! manifesto which gave Paul Keating, the opportunity to transfer the angst and anxiety away from the Government and transfer it onto the Opposition because they made themselves the object of the electorate's scrutiny.

It really is as simple as that and history tells us so. The electorate were given no reason to VOTE OUT the Government because of the opposition's exhibitionism.

Excellent post. And yes the campaign by the Opposition is substandard. But you're honestly telling me people could not see what was happening the last 6 years. Even after the 14 budget. People well and truly know they just don't want change. They are happy with their day to day lives and climbing, fulfilling their aspirations. etc.

I'd argue Australia is simply very conservative and has a natural bent that way. The query with your argument is it should switch both ways. Labor were turfed in an instant when the conservatives cried and bitched at a mining or carbon tax. Then everyone whinges about climate change or lack of services. Go figure.

Fact is Australia is just naturally right leaning. Add in the advantage of the Nats and Liberals will always start ahead.

 

[RupieDupie]

Well there's a shock - banks are greedy.

I did something to change my circumstances instead of crying about them. And I didn't have to get into the Whiskas to do it.

Pal OTOH...……..

Well there’s a shock Banks are greedy, so the solution is for everyone on median income in Australia, who doesn’t own a house, should move to the country...

If a person doesn’t want to be assaulted they should just ask to be imprisoned

 

[Borisdog]

Why do you think there is cheap housing in the country?
It’s because there are no well paying jobs nor services out here

Rubbish. There are certainly depressed areas in the sticks, but there are plenty doing just fine.

But I will grant you there's lots of things that the country lacks that the cities have in abundance.

Pollution, traffic to name a couple.

 

[Borisdog]

Well there’s a shock Banks are greedy, so the solution is for everyone on median income in Australia, who doesn’t own a house, should move to the country...

If a person doesn’t want to be assaulted they should just ask to be imprisoned

Nice tangent.

It's an option, not a solution.

We all have options.

 

[RupieDupie]

Nice tangent.

It's an option, not a solution.

We all have options.

It’s not a tangent, you and I see the world differently. If a person frequently drinks and drives and they also have a lot of money and political clout, you sound like you’d be happy for everyone else to stop driving altogether and catch the train to avoid the drunk driver running into them.

 

[smelly cat]

These wing nuts are to stoned to realise the damage they are doing to the ALP.

Good point. But just a note-
A wingnut is typically someone with extreme right wing views.
I believe the term you're after is a moonbat.

 

[Kram]

A wingnut is typically someone with extreme right wing views.

I always thought that was someone with big ears.

 

[dmc333]

Labor are so smart they're stupid. Too many plans and not enough bullshit and lies.

They should be willing to blame the Liberals for everything from Ivan Milat to the clouds in the sky.

If house prices keep falling they should hollering from the rooftops about it being on Morrison. The next thing coming will likely be $2 petrol, that should be branded a tax by the liberals and Morrison because they're poor economic managers. Who cares if it's the truth.

They'll let it slip though.

 

[Borisdog]

It’s not a tangent, you and I see the world differently. If a person frequently drinks and drives and they also have a lot of money and political clout, you sound like you’d be happy for everyone else to stop driving altogether and catch the train to avoid the drunk driver running into them.

Not at all.

I was, however, directly in control of my options.

I didn't like my circumstances and I chose to change them.

Your arguments are becoming increasingly more spurious and silly, but I did enjoy the discussion.

Must be off now, I have things to do. Enjoy.

 

[smelly cat]

I always thought that was someone with big ears.

That too! But in political speak, usually a righty nutter.

 

[RupieDupie]

Not at all.

I was, however, directly in control of my options.

I didn't like my circumstances and I chose to change them.

Your arguments are becoming increasingly more spurious and silly, but I did enjoy the discussion.

Must be off now, I have things to do. Enjoy.

Oh no, they’re not silly and spurious, there was this thing called a Royal Commission. It’s a fact. Banks wronged people, illegally, for greed.

This is the circumstance, and yet your solution is for everyone on median income (nurses, police, teachers etc) who don’t yet own a house to move to the country?

 

[GoldenSky]

Also another thing that may have backfired: the promise to directly subsidise the wages of child care workers.

I think they are terribly underpaid for the qualifications they have and the work they do (there is a lot of education paperwork behind the scenes and it is indeed an early education role today, not just wiping boogies).

Rather than invoking sympathy and pro-women sentiment, perhaps non-child care worker voters thought 'Jeez I wish the government would step in and give me a 20% pay rise! Why only them?'

I don't think it had an impact. BUT it was an absolutely ROTTEN policy that played to the WORST side of those in Labor who favour identity politics.

 

[AbrahamS]

those in Labor who favour identity politics.

Which of them doesn't?

 

[Taylor]

When you go after the elderly they start talking to their children and grandchildren about how much it will flow onto them.

 

[GoldenSky]

Which of them doesn't?

Ha true.

 

[GoldenSky]

When you go after the elderly they start talking to their children and grandchildren about how much it will flow onto them.

Exactly! How much seniors save up in retirement directly affects how much younger Australians will inherit!!

 

[Rotayjay]

Actually Labor is now developing a track record of federal election chokes.

1998 - running against the Coalition's highly unpopular GST, win the gross national 2PP but don't win enough seats.
2001 - promising to repeal the still-unpopular GST, leading for a long time, then allow the Coalition to walk all over them regarding national security.
2004 - Doing okay but get destroyed by Howard who even wins a majority in the Senate.
2007 - win.
2010 - Big majority squandered. Hang on as minority government.
2013 - Not an electoral choke. Heavily defeated as expected.
2016 - Leading the precious Newspolls all the way but the Turnbull government is returned with a one-seat majority.
2019 - The unloseable election for a variety of reasons but the hoped-for Labor swings are tiny or go the opposite way. Government returned.

Something is repeatedly going wrong with the way Labor tries to convince Australia. I support Labor over the Coalition personally. More often than not, they fail to get the majority of Australians on side in enough local areas.

 

[Sainteric]

When you go after the elderly they start talking to their children and grandchildren about how much it will flow onto them.

This is it , I work some of my time around elderly people and I gurantee you the had baseball bats out for Bowen/alp regardless of the ins and outs of the policy. They just panic

Political strategists know this, why the xxxx did the alp go there especially when they had to win seats with huge ageing demographics.

 

[Rotayjay]

Exactly! How much seniors save up in retirement directly affects how much younger Australians will inherit!!

Do we want a country where your financial wellbeing in your 40s-70s is largely determined by how much you get from your departed parents? Should more and more opportunities from birth to 30 be determined by the size of your local Bank of Mum and Dad? In my view, we should be building a country where every Australian has a genuine opportunity to have a good life regardless of their parents' wealth.

This is not medieval Europe. Feathering the nests of wealthy families with tax loopholes and handouts doesn't help Australians as a whole buy a house, be cared for when sick, or give their kids a good education. It just feathers the nests of those certain families and leaves millions of Australians behind.

Increasing concentration of wealth and income across the world is known as 'The Great U-turn' to sociologists. To some people, 'that's life' but in my view it's a huge societal issue.

Given the embarrassment of Labor at this election, at this stage I honestly do not know where the fight against inequality in Australia is going to go from here.