Which failed PM campaign would you be most interested in seeing history changed for?

[MC Bad Genius]

Over the last 50 years, there has been 19 federal elections, which means 19 big "What Ifs" that the Australian public could ask.

If you were able to go back in time to change history, who would you be most interested in seeing win their failed Prime Ministerial campaign? And why them?

I'm not sure what prompted me to ask, but I'm genuinely intrigued as to what the responses would be. So have at it!

 

[Gough]

Keating in 96, we'd have moved away from the US and towards Asia but Australia decided we needed a backwards suburban lawyer who thought society peaked sometime in the 50s.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

Keating in 96, we'd have moved away from the US and towards Asia but Australia decided we needed a backwards suburban lawyer who thought society peaked sometime in the 50s.

Do you think Howard would've had another crack if he had lost in 96? Or would the Liberal party have moved on?

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I think Beazley would have been a good PM. Don't know why the public seemed to prefer the rodent. Would have liked to have seen him become PM in 1998, we could have avoided children overboard and the regressive GST.

 

[spinynorman]

“Interested”?

I dunno, Whitlam winning in 1975 seems a pretty wild alternate universe. I don’t see how Fraser survives that, and I’m not sure where the Libs go after that, as Howard and Peacock are t really ready yet. Does Whitlam make a strong push for republicanism 20 years before Keating? How does he respond to the shift in neoliberalism? Does it mean the Libs are in charge in the 1980s and overseeing the Reaganite/Thatcherite era instead of Hawke? And then what does Labor stand for without that Hawke/Keating era? I dunno, a lot of hinge points there - and to an extent in 1977, though I think that’s less devastating for the Liberals.

Otherwise most of the governments who lost were spent forces and I think would’ve been lost at sea if they’d won additional terms.

But of the oppositions:

Hayden winning would’ve meant the Hawke/Keating tensions become the Hayden/Hawke tensions. I’m not sure how much that changes things. Any of the Liberal elections against Hawke would similarly have been a government rife with tensions. Howard in 1987 was a lot less savvy than he was by the 90s, I’m not sure what his more explicit racism would’ve meant for the country (especially with the bicentennial peak nationalism that we already had).

Peacock and Hewson in the 90s would be interesting to see if they’re successful holding off the conservatives at bay. Would the Pauline Hanson ouster lead to a more substantive split without Howard giving the conservatives a reassurance.

I don’t have as much time for Beazley as others and I’m not sure he would’ve been able to hold off the post-9/11 move of neoconservatism particularly successfully. It’s more interesting to consider what the Liberals would’ve been without Howard as this colossal figure of triumph. Latham in 2004 is interesting for the question of when the implosion occurs and how Labor responds.

Abbott winning in 2010 would’ve been a huge shock. Gillard would be a pariah and Rudd vindicated. I think Abbott would’ve been a hero in the Libs and a cautionary tale to mean he wouldn’t be knocked off in his first term, but he still would’ve been incredibly unpopular. Rudd’s probably Labor leader again and wins 2013. He probably doubles down on his first term project. The popularity will likely fade as it becomes clear he’s a smug vengeful prick, and whichever Liberal is standing gets the benefit.

Shorten seemed to have more ambition than Albanese and I think would’ve been somewhat more progressive. Interesting to consider how he would’ve reacted to Covid, and whether that and the subsequent inflation crisis would’ve derailed or changed some of his program.

It’s pretty clear Dutton was leading a rabble who had no talent below him. I think they would’ve been quickly exposed, but it’s a bit early to look at what global moment they would’ve been caught up in.

 

[NSWCROW]

2013 because **** abbott
2016 because we never got the chance to vote him out and we've had to put up with sooky abbott fanbois ever since

 

[Bluelegs]

Out of the ones I could vote in I picked a 2019 Labor victory as it would have seen substantial changes to negative gearing. 2013 is an interesting one as Labor got smashed because of in-fighting and the carbon tax. It's difficult to imagine a world where they get up that year, probably would have required Rudd to stay in power for his second term outright and get the ETS done.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

I think Beazley would have been a good PM. Don't know why the public seemed to prefer the rodent. Would have liked to have seen him become PM in 1998, we could have avoided children overboard and the regressive GST.

Yeah, the GST never being instituted would be an interesting case study in whether it would be dead in the water or if it would've continued to be a policy platform in future elections.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

2013 because **** abbott
2016 because we never got the chance to vote him out and we've had to put up with sooky abbott fanbois ever since

I mean, he lost his seat completely. The only remaining Abbott fans seems to be a perfect overlap of Sky After Dark viewers i.e. f-all.

 

[Gethelred]

Shorten 2019 is a pretty significant hinge, IMO.

He went to that election with stormclouds entirely manufactured by establishment forces hovering atound him. The polls swung and swung extremely hard over the last two weeks into the election, almost as though the Australian people thought the inevitable Labor government was going to end the world.

He had a fully costed policy platform with brave reform, and his demise signaled the end of his party's bravery.

He wins that election, he probably does enough to stave off defeat as the Libs are precisely as facile as they are now. Morrison doesn't get stronger due to the defeat, his deception of Turnbull and Abbott sours the Libs on his leadership and he gets knifed upon losing.

Who takes his place, I don't know, but it's probably not Sussan Ley.

 

[nut]

Shorten 2019 is a pretty significant hinge, IMO.

He went to that election with stormclouds entirely manufactured by establishment forces hovering atound him. The polls swung and swung extremely hard over the last two weeks into the election, almost as though the Australian people thought the inevitable Labor government was going to end the world.

He had a fully costed policy platform with brave reform, and his demise signaled the end of his party's bravery.

He wins that election, he probably does enough to stave off defeat as the Libs are precisely as facile as they are now. Morrison doesn't get stronger due to the defeat, his deception of Turnbull and Abbott sours the Libs on his leadership and he gets knifed upon losing.

Who takes his place, I don't know, but it's probably not Sussan Ley.

If shorten and Labor won 2019 it would have has to deal with Covid….. and probably ends up a one term government

 

[Gethelred]

If shorten and Labor won 2019 it would have has to deal with Covid….. and probably ends up a one term government

And the bushfires.

But Labor have historically risen to the challenges that happen during their terms. Dunno if you can predict that quite so accurately.

 

[MC Bad Genius]

If shorten and Labor won 2019 it would have has to deal with Covid….. and probably ends up a one term government

I completely agree with this. Even if the Labor party had made the EXACT same decisions and implemented the same supports (Jobkeeper, Jobseeker etc) to the EXACT dollar amount, they would have been absolutely hammered by the Liberals and the media and would've been decimated at the next election with the "poor economic managers" tagline doing all the work.

 

[Kyptastic]

If shorten and Labor won 2019 it would have has to deal with Covid….. and probably ends up a one term government

Or, they would have got a Covid bump if they did their jobs competently, ran quarantine effectively and procured vaccines quickly and get reelected comfortably.

In that scenario, it would be interesting to see what changes in all the state elections aroudn that time - Does Andrews get another Landslide in 2022? If WA doesn't need to close its borders and therefore have to be sued by Clive Palmer, does McGowan get his landslide? Interesting hypotheticals.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Yeah, the GST never being instituted would be an interesting case study in whether it would be dead in the water or if it would've continued to be a policy platform in future elections.

It probably would have come back, after all it was passed not that long after it seemed killed off with Hewson's campaign.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

Or, they would have got a Covid bump if they did their jobs competently, ran quarantine effectively and procured vaccines quickly and get reelected comfortably.

In that scenario, it would be interesting to see what changes in all the state elections aroudn that time - Does Andrews get another Landslide in 2022? If WA doesn't need to close its borders and therefore have to be sued by Clive Palmer, does McGowan get his landslide? Interesting hypotheticals.

I think you answered your own question. The state governments got bumper returns by being mostly competent through covid.
Morrison got trounced (in all his ministries), in part, for not being seen that way in that and other emergencies. Without that comparison to be made the state governments might not have got quite the results they did though.

 

[Number37]

Keating in 96, we'd have moved away from the US and towards Asia but Australia decided we needed a backwards suburban lawyer who thought society peaked sometime in the 50s.

We could have been Norway. Instead we are Florida.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I completely agree with this. Even if the Labor party had made the EXACT same decisions and implemented the same supports (Jobkeeper, Jobseeker etc) to the EXACT dollar amount, they would have been absolutely hammered by the Liberals and the media and would've been decimated at the next election with the "poor economic managers" tagline doing all the work.

Politics is a foul business. Media is a foul business. And they found each other.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I voted Beazley 2001.

Can’t begin to imagine how Tampa and 9/11 would have panned out with him at the helm instead of Lying Rodent, but in a way I think that’s a testament to just how potentially different things might have been.