Why can’t we keep calling elections until the Liberals win?

I am appalled by the arrogance of the Prime Minister declining to call an election now, before the detail of her carbon tax is revealed. It’s been almost a year since the Liberals lost – is it really fair for them to have to wait another two before they get to go again? Why can’t we just keep having elections until the Liberal Party wins?

It’s what we do with football grand finals – the losing team gets to demand a rematch to be held immediately. It’s what we do in any other competitive arena, where a decision is reached between two sides and immediately junked because the loser won’t accept it. Why should the losing side not get to keep going just because they lost? Why can’t we have weekly grand finals? Why can’t we have elections, if not every week, at least every six months?

And in the case of Gillard, it’s even more important, because she BROKE HER WORD. In exactly the same way as when the rightful rulers of Australia (the Liberal and National parties) promised at the 2007 election to implement an emissions trading scheme and then blocked it, she promised not to implement a carbon tax and then changed her mind. And, in contrast with all those times John Howard broke a “non core” promise, and wasn’t required to call a new election to renew his “mandate”, there’s one fundamental difference which makes anything but a new election completely unacceptable: if we don’t have an election now, then the Liberals can’t govern for at least another two years.

Even though their supporters in the community and News Ltd want them to. It’s just so unfair.

11 responses to “Why can’t we keep calling elections until the Liberals win?

  1. Catching up

    oor Mr. Abbott, he must have forgotten we voted and he lost the last election.

    This is not 1975. We do not have Mr. Kerr and he does not have control of the Senate.

    Also there has been no ministers sacked or accuse of misbehaviour.

    The economy is travelling reasonably well.

    Unemployment is low, inflation within limits set by the treasury and interest rates steady.

    I do not believe that just because you do not like a government and the opportunity arises is grounds to force a new election.

    The cost pressures of food and petrol is hopefully of a temporary nature.

    Yes water ans electricity have risen, but still among the cheapest in the world.

    We need to secure our future water needs and this cost money. The electricity system has been allowed to run down, as well as coal prices reaching record prices over a long length of time.

    There is no way Mr. Abbott can do any better, no matter what he promises.

    Mr. Abbott needs to tell us what he would do in the real world that exists today, not in one that exists in his imagination.

    We have had weeks of Mr. Abbott’s electioneering campaign. To night he has launched or is it relaunched his election opening speech. It has very little to do with the budget.

    Surely Mr. Abbott did not or has not forgotten we voted and he lost. It is made up of every slogan he has ever made.

    He will announce a list of savings in good time before the election.


    Lateline said that even the copy of the speech given to the media was a year out of date. Mr. Abbott did not keep his promise not to be boring. I have news for Mr. Abbott, budgets are about figures and are often by their nature, boring but I hope informative.

  2. Catching up

    Mr. Abbott made a call last night that the first duty of a politician was to do no harm.

    Besides elevating his procession to that of a doctor, he should look at his own behaviour as Opposition leader.

    Surely if a PM first duty to do no harm, surely a responsible Opposition leader would be aware of the same need.

    Mr. Abbott has since he has been appointed to his position after deposing Mr. Turnbull continued with great ferocity to talk the economy down at every opportunity he gets.

    Mr. Abbott has not accepted the legality of the present government and is doing all in his power to bring it down. The only reason he has that he believes he should be PM and he does not like Labor.

    Mr. Abbott has continued to waste taxpayer’s money continually travelling the country for no more reason than to have photos taken in new back grounds and repeating slogans which amount to lies and scare tactics.

    Mr. Abbott sees his job as to destroy a government that at the end of the day was voted in by the people and gained it legality on the floor of the lower house.

    The man has a policy of opposing everything, no matter whether it is good for the country or not.

    It is the man’s intention to keep the government off balance with the aim of ensuring it is unable to government Efficiently. His only concern is his own interest at the expense of the whole country.

    Mr. Abbott has no intention of playing the role of Opposition leader in the present government. He refuses to analyse and offer improvements to any legislation put forwarded. He is not even interested in saying why something is wrong, only opposing because he believes this is the way to become PM.

    He is too lazy to do the work to be a competent Opposition leader. He does not care that the only way he can get his risk is to cause the country to descend into disarray.

    He does not care that we have passed through a world wide financial crisis and Australia’s economy along with the rest of the world is still fragile.

    Mr. Abbott does not care about the budget, the people and the economy. All he cares about is what he considers to be his right so be PM.

    He does not care for your family but he does see his high two income family as being needy. Maybe if he did not refinance his home with such a high mortgage to continue to live the lifestyle he has come accustom too, he would manage better. Maybe he needs to have his income quarantined by the government to help him look after his family. If it is fair for the Aboriginals and those on benefits, it is fair for him.

    If Mr. Abbott is correct about this government and his ability to rule, all he has to do is wait to the next election which is not that far away.

    Mr. Abbott would also be aware he will not have a free rein to do as he likes if he was able to obtain the role of PM. He will have to deal with a hostile Senate, one I believe would have little intent to be obliging for many years.

    Mr. Abbott has proven by his actions that he does not believe he can win by waiting. He knows that the government is not as bad as he is painting it. Mr. Abbott’s biggest fear is as time goes on, his scare tactics will not work. He has no other skills or ability to offer.

    What we are hearing is Mr. Abbott’s last hurray. The sad part is that he believes he can pull it off. In Mr. Whitlam’s day, the Opposition was able to discredit the government with corruption charges some true, some over exaggerated. They have not been able to do this, but I am expecting to see attempts on the near future.

    Mr. Abbott does not have control of the senate and he does not have a Mr. Kerr. I cannot understand why he and Mr. Hockey appear to be so smug and cocky.

    Heard a comment on ABC24 morning show. “If Mr. Abbott wants to be considered as a legitimate leader, he needs to answer legitimate serious questions about policies details.”

    I would like to add, the copies of the reply speech to the media was a year out of date.

    If anyone is interested, Mr. Robb’s interview on Lateline was revealing/ It showed haw little depth there is to their proposals when a little in depth questions are asked and answers questioned. Mr. Robb, with gentle interviewing was reduced to a stuttering mush. He had no answers. Mr. Abbott was little netter this morning.

  3. jordanrastrick

    Its not Abbott’s fault specifically, or at least I can’t lay the blame at his feet because Tanner has outlined the real problem.

    People are wired to pay more attention to bad news than to good. The media, under financial pressure, increasingly seeks to exploit this psychology for the temporary salvation of their business model. The politicians must dance to the media’s tune. So an opposition’s job becomes to lie about how bad things are, and a government’s job becomes to lie about how much worse things would be under their opponents. The electoral’s cognitive dissonance, that things are pretty good from their daily experience but that the world is about to end according to the headlines, is pretty potent but not unsustainable thus far.

    I worry though that if things genuinely get tough all of the irrational anger will find an outlet at places other than the ballot box. In this sense our politicians are culpable to the extent which they erode our civic discourse more than they need to for their own short term gain; Abbott seems like one of the worst offenders, but that could just be my own bias creeping in.

  4. Catching up

    I am nearly 70 but have had trouble understanding how Germans which I have found to be decent people, could allow Mr. Hitler to gain the power he did in popular elections. To do so, they must have at sometime supported his beliefs, even those which was against their own personal values or interest.

    As a close follower of politics in this country, I have seen a massive change in the last decade or two, of many ignoring facts and holding onto perceptions that neither benefit them or are false.

    I still do not understand the process, but I do acknowledge it occurs.

    We have had handed down a budget that many experts see as fair and balance. Most families, especially those with school age children and teenagers will greatly benefited.

    We have a budget that addresses the needs of those who are disabled and mentally ill for the first time.

    What is attracting all their attention. It is the freezing of the upper income limits that you can claim family benefits. This has occurred since 2009 at least. The Coalition supported the move.

    Anyone that earns less than $150,000, (less than 15% of dual income families will still receive benefits. The same people have not objected when tax deductions were given for the last ten years, deductions that benefited the upper income earner much more than those lower on the income ladder.

    I am not saying the budget is perfect, no budget is. The budget is not as bad as public perception seem to believe.

    We have a community where the needy appear to be fighting the battles of the strong and powerful. There is no benefited to those on the bottom of the ladder fighting battle of the well off and rich.

  5. On the topic of cognitive dissonance a lot of Australians will have a bad headache if they ever learn the truth about income in this country.

    Fairfax reports that 47% of people (or at least 47% of the 400 people that were polled) think that a person earning $150,000 is ‘about average’. Matt Cowgill brilliantly demonstrated that the average is about one third of that – not that the media would ever bother reporting stuff like that, you know dispelling misconceptions and all. So 47% of Australians (roughly the amount of people who are ‘below average) think that $150K is roughly ‘middle class’.

    Andrew Leigh however has blogged about how the vast majority of people think they are middle class. In 1999 almost half the people questioned said that they fell into either the 4th or 5th decile of income earning.

    So how can roughly the same amount of people say that they belong to a group of income deciles that should hold only 2 tenths of the population and also say that $150K (which places you within the top 3/4% percent of income earners) is ‘middle class’. They are believing in two contradictory things at once – that everyone who makes $150,000 is in the middle decile of income and that they are also in the middle decile of income when they themselves don’t make $150,000.

    If you ever find someone and are able to get them to answer those two questions (i.e answering that they think $150K is about average and that they think they are roughly in the middle decile of income distribution – assuming they don’t make $150K of course) and confront them with these facts let us know what happens. I assume most of them will get angry at you.

  6. narcoticmusing

    DaveB – you confuse the situation in people’s mind with facts. Of course people will get angry when you use facts. 😉

  7. You people are heartless – he’s been Opposition Leader and House Punching Bag for MONTHS!!! A fate from which our various struggling media organs proved powerless to save him.
    And as if that’s not enough, he now learns that this ATHEIST, NON-BREEDING, LIVING-IN-SIN COMMUNIST is snatching all the bogan bribes* from 700-grand-mortgaged battlers like him!
    Even Gerry Harveys generous terms** can’t protect them from this!
    (looks out the window for the inevitable frog deluge)



  8. Catching up

    lycurgus, those who live by the sword are likely to die by the sword. Mr. Abbott ]s only skill is too treat anyone that does not agree with him like a punching bag.

    Personally I am of the belief, that if he chooses to treat me along with the general public as a fool, he is a idiot if does not expect the same in return.

    When he manages to behave like an mature adult and not like the boy with his baseball cap on back the front, he might just get the respect you seem to think he has earned.

  9. Catching up

    lycurgus, I think you might find the boats will be stopped, and more to the point, those on the boats will not enter this country. Now that should make you happy.

    Personally I do have some concerns as to how it is being done. Mr. Howard did not stop the boat people from entering the country. What he put in place was a very expensive to us, barrier that slow up but did not prevent the entry of the boat people.

    The movement of refugees rises and falls over time. It was inevitable that people stranded in Indonesia for years felt that the only option was to once again get on the boats.

    We have prevented this if we took more directly from Indonesia, giving the people some hope that may have been allowed to come to Australia. I believe the numbers in Indonesia is not great and would be within our yearly refugee intake.

    I do not like the idea of sending people to other countries, especially Malaysia but the people will have the choice of not getting on the boats. We need to keep our side of the bargain by taking as many as possible from these countries.

  10. You do understand that I was making fun of the Mad Monk*?

    *(yes, he was a monk)

  11. Catching up

    No he was a trainee priest.

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 )

Connecting to %s