Will they miss him when he’s gone?

One thing political junkies love to do is speculate about which of its members an opposing group should make its leader. It’s a purely rhetorical enterprise, since there’s no way in a blue fit we’d vote for any of them, but it appears to be somewhat entertaining to sit on one side and give advice to people whose best interests we clearly do not have at heart.

Which, of course, brings us to Malcolm Turnbull.

Malcolm is this week having difficulty with his conservative base. The fact that he’s a hardline economic rightwinger, a former banker, a close friend to corporate Australia, is not enough – he campaigned for a Republic, and he wants the Liberal party to vote for Rudd’s cut-down half-arsed barely-there response to the probability of devastating climate change. So they’re considering rolling him.

Do we, who want the Liberals to lose, want him replaced? Is Joe “Workchoices” Hockey more electable? Is Tony “Roman Catholic laws for all Australians” Abbott?

The further to the right they go, presumably the less likely to win an election they get, which is a good thing for progressives – but it also raises the stakes, and would be much more devastating if they pulled it off.

So who’s it going to be? Who would you advise them to pick? What about if you actually had the conservative base’s interests at heart?

And how have the Liberals fallen so hard for the kind of wedge politics of which their former leader was such a diabolical expert?

Advertisements

26 responses to “Will they miss him when he’s gone?

  1. For the last couple of years I’ve been hoping for Abbott as leader and Chris Pyne as deputy – purely for the comedic value. But now the Other Kevin has thrown his hat into the ring, I may have to reconsider…

  2. I dunno Jeremy.
    Maybe the further to the right the Libs go and the less likely they are to win also means the more the ALP can be confident to screw us all over without having to worry about being voted out.

  3. Maybe the need an elder statesman like Pillock Ruddock to hold the fort while they regroup.

    The alternative would be to pick someone who is likely to be around when they next win an election. Alex Hawke perhaps. Provided he doesn’t resume his former career of stacking supermarket shelves.

  4. “which is a good thing for progressives ”

    Yes but an ineffective opposition is a bad thing, just look at Victoria!

    “Will they miss him when he’s gone?”

    Yes, I believe he is their best prospect, granted he’s not much of a prospect but I reckon the next election defeat would be more devastating under say Abbott.

    Andrews? He won’t last six months.

    I asked PP, why not Robb, I also suggested that the Libs could do a lot worse than Pyne. Thing is it can’t be Pyne, it has to be a climate change denier, if not why oust Turnbull in the first place?

  5. “And how have the Liberals fallen so hard for the kind of wedge politics of which their former leader was such a diabolical expert?”

    heh, for all Turnbull’s talents politics isn’t one of them. Maybe he just isn’t enough of a ratbag?

    Geez, I’m starting to sound like a Turnbull fan! It’s all relative I suppose.

  6. Good point EvShow and Rob – although maybe that’s what’s needed to get an actual left-wing party mainstream.

  7. “although maybe that’s what’s needed to get an actual left-wing party mainstream.”

    Not likely until left wing parties start showing some responsibility and cease to be seen as “gimmicky” and “stunt-pulling”. You know, actual responsibility. For all facets of government, not just their pet agendas.

    For mine, Turnbull will pull through. Labor will get it’s ETS, and we will end up with a confusing new tax on energy and production that does little if anything for the climate. How fantastic all round.

  8. I don’t think you get the point of representative democracy.

    I don’t want to vote for a party that pretends to represent 50% of the electorate. I want to vote for a party that represents voters with my particular views on issues.

    If two such parties need to combine to form government, then that’s still better than lumping us all in together. The ALP is the living embodiment of why that doesn’t work – it works for power, but it doesn’t work for democracy.

  9. It’s gotta be the ‘drop dead’ dream team of Andrews and Ruddock. Given they’re acting like a pack of zombies, why not have a leadership team that is clinically dead?

    More Brains!!!!!

  10. Put the “Fondue Fork In” Turnbull’s done.

    But how’s Andrews at his media conference?Like a petulant school boy, with having just been caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

    I reckon put in the mad monk, I will be able to master self flagellation with out all that guilt.

    Anyway getting rid of Turnbull will put the kabosh on the Liberals getting back into government anytime soon.

    I’m all for that.

  11. Yea Gruffy.

    Yes Andrews does look like a mortician come to think of it.

    Yea the “Ruddock & Andrews” funeral directors.It has a nice ring to it.

    Turnbull can be their first customer.

  12. lets not rule out the Queen of Indi Sophie Mirabella.
    if the rest of the country would just listen to her far right views on just about everything including the late nights she spent helping the former PM to tie his shoe laces, what’s his bloody name? you know that little fellow with glasses…..oh bugger it just have Sophie please then Indi can get back to sleep….

  13. The trouble is Malcolm Turnbull is the brightest of the lot.

    Some of the others in the Liberal Party are so cortically-challenged I find myself doubting Evolution.

  14. thevoiceofreason

    Malcome will survive and trive as long as he stay strong and does not cave to what he doesn’t believe in.

  15. thevoiceofreason – the problem with that theory is that various members of the Liberal Party just aren’t smart enough to realise that he’s their best electoral asset.

    One of the hangovers of the Howard Era was that some Ministers (now, thankfully, former Ministers) developed an exalted sense of self-importance. Even now, they think they are players when they actually fell off the tree two years ago. They don’t realise their opinions no longer matter; the majority of the party room just aren’t listening.

    I’m not looking at anyone in particular, but I will point to those who were Howard’s most loyal supporters (you can make up your own mind who they are).

    They think they are always right and they are positive they are right on one thing: Malcolm Turnbull will be the death of the Liberal Party as they know it.

    “As they know it” being the key phrase; unless they learn to embrace the future with a *new* Liberal Party, they will be consigned to opposition for many, many years to come.

  16. Spot on sceptic. People like Andrews, Tuckey, and Mirrabella have this crazy idea that if they make their current policies more extreme than the policies they took to the 2007 train wreck, they will get back in.
    If turnbull gets rolled the conservatives will be in opposition until the ALP become so corrupt and arrogant people vote for the “anyone but Labor” party. I’m tipping that will take at least 16 years given how little Australians pay attention to politics.

  17. Joe Hockey is by far the most likable and electable Liberal candidate for PM.

    I think many people have drawn the conclusion from the Rudd-Hockey debates on Sunrise that Hockey is Rudd’s equal when it comes to leadership abilities.

    I think Hockey is more genuine with the public than Rudd is (though that would change if he was elected PM, no doubt) and that more people would rather have a beer with him than with Rudd.

    And I think Hockey has more appeal to migrant families, coming from one himself.

    Judging by his recent speech on religious faith, I reckon he’ll backstab Turnbull with Howard and Costello’s full support before parliament resumes next year (when global warming will not be such a hot topic), or failing that, just after the next election.

    And I hope he leads the Liberals to the next election. I think it would make politics even more interesting than it is now.

  18. “Joe Hockey is by far the most likable and electable Liberal candidate for PM. “

    Not after voters are reminded that he was the Minister in charge of WorkChoices he’s not.

  19. I was really hoping Andrews challenged and won – imagine the Libs going into an election with that racist fuckwit who has about as much personality as a door handle.

  20. Joe Hockey is by far the most likable and electable Liberal candidate for PM.

    Hockey has two left feet, both of which he tries to shove into his mouth simultaneously. Watching his press conference after the leadership spill vote he stuffed up even then – saying the leadership vote was equivalent in numbers to the CPRS vote and *then* remembering the Nationals. And then there’s his unemployment rise is preferable to interest rate rises remark. The man’s a fool.

  21. I like Hockey!

    He’s cuddly.
    Dumb as a box of hammers, but cuddly.

    What more do we need?

    I like Hockey!
    It’s a great game.

    What were we talking about?

    Cheers.

  22. I think Hockey’s reluctance to become leader right now shows he has some brains.

  23. thevoiceofreason

    “thevoiceofreason – the problem with that theory is that various members of the Liberal Party just aren’t smart enough to realise that he’s their best electoral asset.”

    True. Turbull is light years ahead of the rest, I don’t know how he puts up with them.

  24. Loved the “Groundhog Day for the Opposition” headline in the Australian today. Looks like they will have to run it tomorrow as well.

  25. thevoiceofreason

    Abbott will be a disaster as leader he is all over the place on every issue. Howard went ok until he moved to far to the right. The right got fucked at the last election and will continue to do so. Turnbull is acting strong. Turnbull makes up his mind and backs it all the way. Turnbull said he will stake his leadership on this issue months ago they all should have resigned then weak fuckers.

  26. Abbott’s problem is that he is reluctant to own up to his true beliefs on a wide range of issues, particularly those that relate to personal morality (especially sexual morality). He imagines that by indulging in circumlocutions about these issues he will be able to persuade enough people that he’s reasonable man. The trouble is that his evasiveness is so obvious that just about everyone is onto him, and the label of “Captain Catholic” is superglued firmly to his forehead.

    Hockey’s main problem is that he is about half as smart as Abbott, but thinks his amiable persona can carry him through.

    His second biggest problem is that he would be leading a party that just can’t decide whether to get serious about climate change. The split could be as profound as the Labor split of the 50s. I hope so. This country is in desperate need of a fundamental political realignment. Let the Wilson Tuckeys and Eric Abetzes of this world join Vince Gair and Frank McManus and Joh Bjelke-Petersen in the Soylent Green processor of history. They have to be useful for something.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s