Scott Morrison - How Long? (Part 1 - Continued in Part 2)

[Richard Pryor]

A big difference between the US and here is we have compulsory voting. The Trussian propaganda worked to convince Republicans to vote for someone inept, and worked to keep a bunch of people who were horrified by Trump home by confusing them about Hillary. In Aus, you get fined if you don't rock up, so that tactic doesn't work.

Also, we aren't as divided as Americans, but some argue that's because compulsory voting has kept our politicians fairly close to the centre, instead of pulling it all to the right with identity politics. Fear and negativity is seen as a motivator in how many people vote, and in the US they also have to get them to vote on a Tuesday. The US system is not to be looked up to, at all.

The compulsory voting is a double edged sword though. You can't have a lunatic firing up the crazies without the moderates turning up, but you also have a situation where if the PM has a relatively inoffensive public image and exudes a moderate image the moderate and uninformed voter will side with the status quo unless a sufficiently positive (or negative) image is being painted by the opposition.

My comparing the voting habits of the public to the US system is not meant to be an endorsement at all though, just an observation of how I see people voting (anecdotally). I don't think divisiveness or moderateness of our politicians is all that relevant to what I was saying, I think my argument/view/whatever is the oppposite; that if Morrison can successfully convince Joe Public that the crazies in the party are under his thumb and that his is a moderate government he'll be able to do well at an election, regardless of the reality of the situation and the current perception.

My bringing up Hillary was not to suggest that Morrison will be able to win the election like Trump. My point was that if people are voting for a person to lead the country rather than party or policy, assuming that you'll be supported by default if the other guy doesn't look good isn't a valid strategy. Now, if the other person is actively repulsive to the electorate like Trump it is an effective strategy with compulsory voting, so it was a bad analogy, but if the person is simply not charismatic, bland and uninspiring I do not think you can bank on the public voting against them for another non-charismatic candidate by default regardless of how toxic the party is, since I think the majority of the Australian public votes based on the person not the party (see Turnbull winning).

tl;dr I think that if Morrison can successfully paint himself as a moderate who has a leash on the political extremists in his party, and keep his image boring at worst I do not think it will not be an easy win for Shorten.

With that said, if Dutton and Co. can't help themselves, or ScoMo pisses them off (or concedes too much), if he can't keep a lid on his out-there religious beliefs, or if Shorten goes on the offensive, I don't see the LNP winning. Now, I don't think that's how it should be, it's just how I think it is, and it's just based on web-surfing and talking to random people, so it's probably not an opinion that's worth that much.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The highest profile ministers of the Turnbull government:

Turnbull: Gone
Bishop: Gone
Dutton: Bungled a coup, failed, lost the immigration portfolio, will have to fight for his seat, will probably be gone at the next election.
Morrison: Survived, but easily the lowest profile of the above, has to both build his own profile and that of three-four other ministers before the next election.

Also:

Barnaby: Gone, blew his load and his reputation.

The Liberals have put a gun in their mouth and blown their brains out. All for what? Appeasing the uneducated baby boomer cohort of Bolt, Hadley and Jones and their pathetic audience? They have destroyed themselves.

It’s Abbott. He’s an extraordinary wrecking ball.

I suspect Howard knew it and used him in tough portfolios to do ugly stuff.

He’s been co-opted by Murdoch since. Anyone slightly progressive represents a bad outcome for Murdoch so he found his love child in Abbott. The NBN was a particular target.

He destroyed Turnbull, he destroyed Rudd, he destroyed Gillard. He didn’t get his man in this time, but he destroyed Turnbull again nonetheless. He had the bonus incentive of personal revenge this time.

He’ll destroy Morrison if he steps out of line.

Many Liberals won’t even know why they changed leader. But they did. Abbott rallied his troops and the rest got caught up in it.

He wasn’t a PM’s arseh*le. But by god, he’s good at what he does.

One very, very real possibility is he gets the leadership back after the next election. Labor will coast for at least a good while and Abbott will represent an irresistible choice for the Liberals as opposition leader. That will be bad news for Shorten and Labor as Abbott’s track record of destroying everything in his path is almost flawless.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

The compulsory voting is a double edged sword though. You can't have a lunatic firing up the crazies without the moderates turning up, but you also have a situation where if the PM has a relatively inoffensive public image and exudes a moderate image the moderate and uninformed voter will side with the status quo unless a sufficiently positive (or negative) image is being painted by the opposition.

My comparing the voting habits of the public to the US system is not meant to be an endorsement at all though, just an observation of how I see people voting (anecdotally). I don't think divisiveness or moderateness of our politicians is all that relevant to what I was saying, I think my argument/view/whatever is the oppposite; that if Morrison can successfully convince Joe Public that the crazies in the party are under his thumb and that his is a moderate government he'll be able to do well at an election, regardless of the reality of the situation and the current perception.

My bringing up Hillary was not to suggest that Morrison will be able to win the election like Trump. My point was that if people are voting for a person to lead the country rather than party or policy, assuming that you'll be supported by default if the other guy doesn't look good isn't a valid strategy. Now, if the other person is actively repulsive to the electorate like Trump it is an effective strategy with compulsory voting, so it was a bad analogy, but if the person is simply not charismatic, bland and uninspiring I do not think you can bank on the public voting against them for another non-charismatic candidate by default regardless of how toxic the party is, since I think the majority of the Australian public votes based on the person not the party (see Turnbull winning).

tl;dr I think that if Morrison can successfully paint himself as a moderate who has a leash on the political extremists in his party, and keep his image boring at worst I do not think it will not be an easy win for Shorten.

With that said, if Dutton and Co. can't help themselves, or ScoMo pisses them off (or concedes too much), if he can't keep a lid on his out-there religious beliefs, or if Shorten goes on the offensive, I don't see the LNP winning. Now, I don't think that's how it should be, it's just how I think it is, and it's just based on web-surfing and talking to random people, so it's probably not an opinion that's worth that much.

Double edge sword? There's no evidence for that. Australians have a good voting record and the polls aren't too far wrong either. I didn't think we should vote Abbott, and got on BF because of LNP voters saying we should. I didn't understand how they could have such a warped idea. But I still understand why the majority of voters voted for him: Labor were in-fighting. Then almost as soon as Abbott won and gave a terrible acceptance speech and then a terrible budget, the polls slid.

People are not silly, especially once averaged across tens of millions. They may be misinformed thanks to the internet pulling their eyeballs away from good news sources and analysis, but given the Turnbull vote was essentially 'he has said some left sounding things, he might be more moderate than Abbott's Libs', I think it's unrealistic to think people could be fooled if that card was played by ScoMo. He has a track record of right-wingedness.

I value compulsory voting and think more of the world should have it. Remembering that you don't actually have to vote once ticked off the list. A lot of people vote for the party, not the leader, but we should continue to promote a focus on policy, even if people want to care also about personality.

 

[Hawk Dork]

One very, very real possibility is he gets the leadership back after the next election. Labor will coast for at least a good while and Abbott will represent an irresistible choice for the Liberals as opposition leader. That will be bad news for Shorten and Labor as Abbott’s track record of destroying everything in his path is almost flawless.

Hard to do if you dont have the numbers
Libs will find it hard to get elected if they cant attract votes because of their shift to the right and it will stop the flow of money too
I wouldnt be surprised if Abbott gets knocked off with a protest vote if theres a good independantand and Labor candidate sharing votes

 

[Richard Pryor]

Double edge sword? There's no evidence for that. Australians have a good voting record and the polls aren't too far wrong either. I didn't think we should vote Abbott, and got on BF because of LNP voters saying we should. I didn't understand how they could have such a warped idea. But I still understand why the majority of voters voted for him: Labor were in-fighting. Then almost as soon as Abbott won and gave a terrible acceptance speech and then a terrible budget, the polls slid.

People are not silly, especially once averaged across tens of millions. They may be misinformed thanks to the internet pulling their eyeballs away from good news sources and analysis, but given the Turnbull vote was essentially 'he has said some left sounding things, he might be more moderate than Abbott's Libs', I think it's unrealistic to think people could be fooled if that card was played by ScoMo. He has a track record of right-wingedness.

I don't really disagree with any of this, but I think it's still based on the assumption that the general public is well informed. I don't think the average voter is going to be looking into his voting record, and if he hounds Abbott out and has a bit of banter on the 7PM Project I can absolutely see the public buying into it (also think "he deserves a chance" was a factor in the Turnbull vote). In my opinion John Howard showed that people can be pretty silly even when averaged out for a decade.

Now, it does seem like hammering the conservatives isn't what he'll do since he's keeping Dutton looming around, and that will hopefully sink him. Also, if Shorten gets out there a bit more Morrison doesn't have any advantage.

I value compulsory voting and think more of the world should have it. Remembering that you don't actually have to vote once ticked off the list. A lot of people vote for the party, not the leader, but we should continue to promote a focus on policy, even if people want to care also about personality.

Agree with all this, but am pessimistic about how far promoting a focus on policy will go.

 

[imadodgyumpire]

Having Scott Morrison is like not having a Prime Minister at all.

 

[Hawk Dork]

Having Scott Morrison is like not having a Prime Minister at all.

So nothings changed just the face on the sock puppet

 

[imadodgyumpire]

There are some people you could envisage as a PM, and Scott Morrison is not one of them.

 

[Malifice]

Newspoll
Coalition primary 33 (was 37)
Labor primary 41 (was 35)
TPP Labor 56-44 (was 51-49)
Preferred PM
Shorten 39 (was 32)
Morrison 33 (Turnbull was 44)

On behalf of the Trade Union movement, and Labor voters everywhere, I for one want to extend my deepest thanks to Abbott and Bolt.

 

[Lebbo73]

On behalf of the Trade Union movement, and Labor voters everywhere, I for one want to extend my deepest thanks to Abbott and Bolt.

My Union golf mate was telling last Wednesday that he had a meeting at 1:30 that day. Because of the leadership spill, they decided that they wouldn’t need to spend as much money on the next election.

 

[cartwright]

Newspoll

Coalition primary 33 (was 37)
Labor primary 41 (was 35)

TPP Labor 56-44 (was 51-49)

Preferred PM
Shorten 39 (was 32)
Morrison 33 (Turnbull was 44)

For comparison on other changes

 

[Baltimore Jack]

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Founder of Hillsong Church, Frank Houston.

Guilty of child sexual abuse.

Appeared before Royal Commission

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Pyne to Defence and Payne to Foreign Affairs. Poor old Miranda going nuclear on Sky.

If rumours are true Pyne loves a man in uniform.

 

[Showbags]

Wow shocker. Bible basher who fought tooth and nail to give the banks a massive tax cut and voted against a RC, is not particularly popular.

 

[Gough]

Even if the motive behind it is political, I'm glad that Morrison has cut immigration from Home Affairs. Regardless of who is the Minister, far too much power is invested in that portfolio.

 

[Maggie5]

I like Payne for FM

I actually like her too. One of the few that actually answers questions.

Heard Frydenberg this morning, the lines/slogans are going to be - 'new generation' and 'draw a line in the sand'. Yuk.

 

[funk44]

Chief of staff is an ex head of the coal industry and the new environment minister is an ex mining exec...

 

[its free real estate]

Lol that Newspoll is brutal.

 

[funk44]

I actually like her too. One of the few that actually answers questions.

Heard Frydenberg this morning, the lines/slogans are going to be - 'new generation' and 'draw a line in the sand'. Yuk.

Won't last long. Abbort, Potato and co will be spending the next few week re-sharpening their knives for some fresh stabbing in a few weeks time

 

[Maggie5]

I can't believe Birmingham lost his position, one of the better performers. Trade and Tourism? Well he will get to a lot of footy finals and Melbourne Cup.

 

[BlueBayou]

I actually like her too. One of the few that actually answers questions.

Heard Frydenberg this morning, the lines/slogans are going to be - 'new generation' and 'draw a line in the sand'. Yuk.

Yep, I heard that too. The spin doctors have been working overtime.

Also a lot of deflection of questions about the coup. 'That's in the past, lets move on'.

 

[Richard Pryor]

https://www.9news.com.au/2018/08/27...son-offers-tony-abbott-special-envoy-f_270818

Scott Morrison has offered Tony Abbott a role as special envoy for indigenous affairs, but the former prime minister is yet to accept the appointment.

The new prime minister has been in discussions with Mr Abbott after leaving him out of his new-look cabinet, in an effort to heal the wounds of last week's damaging leadership spill.

"It's not exactly clear what he's offering," Mr Abbott said outside his Sydney home today.

Is this a joke?

 

[Maggie5]

Yep, I heard that too. The spin doctors have been working overtime.

Also a lot of deflection of questions about the coup. 'That's in the past, lets move on'.

Frydenberg and Henderson have started off terribly. Turned it off as it was just spin - only another 9 months.

The way Frydenberg answered the question on the Reef funding and the au pair women was terrible.

Don't think Labor will let up asking questions on those two topics plus Dutton and Child Care centres.

 

[Gough]

https://www.9news.com.au/2018/08/27...son-offers-tony-abbott-special-envoy-f_270818
Is this a joke?

Abbott has the solution to the bridging the gap in his mind, Indigenous Australians should just be more like white people. Simples, he's a paternalistic racist in the Cecil Rhodes mode.