Someone or other Graham Young noticed that Kevin Rudd has recently taken to saying “when the election is called in six weeks’ time” and inferred that he’s preparing the ground for a narrative that Howard is cowering from the verdict of the people. That’s probably the case, but I suspect also that Labor’s got some research showing that people are fed up with the temperature of political debate, and just want it all to go away. Howard’s been the one making all the noise, with crazed attacks and big spending announcements as part of The War on The States sometimes several times a day. Meanwhile, Rudd just pops up occasionally on the tv news looking very calm and Prime Ministerial. I wrote back in April that the government was “looking like anything but a safe pair of hands” and that’s surely been only amplified. I suspect the speculation about changes in leadership and the date of the election is also a reflection of this mood – get it over, already. Howard, if I’m right that people are thinking this way, really can’t win whether he waits around for the predicted “scrutiny” to be applied to Rudd or goes when anticipated. Too much political noise is already enough, and there’ll be a fair chunk of people voting for Rudd just to get Howard off the tv every night. Some time ago, I suggested that Howard’s best response to not being able to cut through might be for the coalition to just shut up for a while, and actually act like a government. That’s certainly not been their tactics, as each week brings yet more attempted and very loud rabbits. If they’ve begun to really get on people’s nerves, it won’t just compound their inability to make their message heard (what is it anyway?) but they also run the risk of people wanting to reach for the off button.
65 Responses to “Enough with the hysteria already”
Leave a Reply
Please read the comments policy. If you would like an icon beside your comment, please register a Gravatar.
There is a Comments Preview function below the typing box which activates when you start typing.
I’ve believed for a long time that Howard had too much to do and not enough time to do it in. So what he tries is cramming more and more into the available time, leading to voter fatigue.
In the past couple of weeks we’ve seen water, indigenous affairs, local government, hospital takeovers, terrorism, rural industry woes, interest rate excuses, tax cuts, IR advertising scandals, Costello book revelations, Textor research leaks and Howard’s birthday all eminating from the one source, and all competing for the public’s attention.
The message is confusing. It’s hard to keep track of the latest “election winning”, “decisive” intervention. The prospect is confusing, the outcome even more so. Maybe the idea is to depict the government as so active that in there somewhere the average punter will find something to benefit them, even if the detail is not apparent at the moment.
The other possibility is that the whole shebang will look more and more like indecision and desperation. The pundits are certainly depicting it as such and I think the people will get that message too, in my opinion.
Howard’s performance on the 7.30 Report was but the latest example of why Australians just want him to go away.
KB says the Libs own key pollster claims that the public see Howard as dishonest. Howard says that’s not true, then tries to ‘balance’ the record on pre-war intelligence and Children Overboard.
He still doesn’t get it. That Howard lied Australia into Iraq and delayed recognising the truth about Children Overboard so as to farm as much political capital from it as possible are facts now, accepted truths, by most Australians. No matter how hard Howard tries, he cannot rectify this.
But he tries desperately to do so, regardless, which only makes it worse. Unfortunately, people expect politicians to lie. But they don’t expect them to keep claiming they’re not liars when they clearly are.
And Mark, you’re right. Howard has already worn himself out in the media, even before he has announced the election. How can he do anything now to make people want to see more of him as the election consumes the media?
The more he whines and flails and wails on TV to defend his record, and to try and win the election, the more people will want to see him gone.
Should make for one of the most gruesome political slow-deaths in our history. It won’t be pretty.
Howard looks increasingly like a desperate man who is engaging in increasingly desperate tactics to win re-election.
What has long been forgotten is that he engaged in the same tactics during his final days as Treasurer in the Fraser government. In his last budget in 1982 he spent huge amounts to build the new Brisbane airport, a decision which was motivated purely by the (as it turned out, futile) desire to hold on to Liberal seats in the 1983 election and which was not even close to being justified on its merits. He also came up with a crack pot scheme which involved directing the Reserve Bank to free up its reserves for housing lending, which very nearly led to an unprecedented public show down between the Reserve Bank and the government.
Very significantly, Howard is now losing the support of commentators who are visceral conservatives; people like Alan Wood in today’s GG.
(oops, hit return too quickly.)
The importance of losing people like Wood is not that the voting public reads him. Hardly anyone reads him. But what is important is that one of things people have admired (sometimes begrudgingly) about Howard is that he has been seen to stick to what he believes in, even at short term cost to his own popularity.
Now he is seen as a man who will say or do anything to get re-elected, no matter how bad the policy is (and the intervention in Tasmania is as bad as it gets.) He’s seen as a a 68 year old man who is selling his soul, and for what? – just so he can go on until he’s 70 or 71 or beyond, and just to stop that nice and hamless Mr Rudd becoming PM.
Interest rates have risen .25% so it looks like goodnight and goodluck,John.
I think it can only get worse for the government form now on. ie/ a significant proportion of people are already so sick of hearing from Howard and his ministers ranting that they have switched off, they just want the election to come an for this rabid bunch to just go away. I think Howard should have called the election as soon as he could have (don’t know when that was ?) but early this year when KRud was still new…..now its all too late…..
Its great to talk to yourself on occasions and, in lieu of that, to talk to a mirror image of yourself on Larvatus Prodeo. No disagreements ever and a comfortable sense of, of course I am always right and my future visions will be validated.
Echoes, echoes – all around me echoes. No darkness – it is all clear to me … errr, us.
But why the need for such comfort? Certainly not to inform – we were told already.
Persistent neurotic, self-doubts perhaps? You couldn’t be wrong could you? Could you? COULD YOU?
You might be right about the Government having too much to say. I was listening to Hockey yesterday in parliament and really, it was just a hysterical rant of dogma, cliches and gratuiotous abuse. All said very loudly and stridently to prove the veracity of his argument.
It sounded like he was trying to convince himself of the merits of his assertions rather than anyone else.
The image in my mind was of a raving loony frothing at the mouth. Hardly, likely to convince anyone other than your fellow inmates.
But then he would have risked not getting another APEC shirt photo-op with the leader of the free world, virtualkat. He’s ensuring his photographic legacy!
The issues that Howard is now being justly pilloried as a liar on existed prior to the last election – Iraq, Children Overboard, etc. People didn’t care then, or at least not enough to prevent him being elected. His problems this time are interest rates, coupled with the fact the general public are just sick of him – not just this year’s electioneering, but generally. He can’t win, and I mean that in both senses of the term – the longer he leaves it to call the election, the worse it will get.
You’re a poet, HC.
And I agree, a lot of commenters here are setting themselves up for quite a few tears before bedtime should the Coalition win, which they’re quite capable of doing with the seats they still hold.
You say that like it’s a bad thing, Michael Paul. You communist.
Harry, your strident and hysterical tone – HYSTERICAL TONE – does you no credit.
By the way, no mention today by the RBA Governor of borrowing state Labor governments (for your benefit, Harry, that’s STATE LABOR GOVERNMENTS) as the reason why the RBA put up interest rates.
Could this be because a) the RBA Governor is a Kevin Rudd stooge or b) state government borrowing, contra Howard, as nothing to do with it (for your benefit, Harry, that’s NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.)
Ah well, Liam – I admit that my dizzy optimism in response to the recent mistakes and missteps of the Coalition may well prove to be premature. A week is a long time in politics and all that.
Still, I’m very much enjoying the show at the moment.
Or could it be, Spiros, that interest rates were the last election issue, and as irrelevant to the contest of this one as amendments to the Migration Act were in 2004?
Everyone here wrote the NSW State Labor Government off a couple of months ago, I seem to recall, on the same grounds: out of touch incumbents, no policy direction, quantifiable failures of governance, etc. etc. When they treated the election as a large number of separate local polls and very successfully demonised the opposition, they won.
Me too!
Re. the interest rate hike: I’m willing to pay more for the next few years just to get rid of JHo. Unfortunately, some people with low doc mortgages may lose their homes. So much for the battlers.
How do you spin that HC? Oh, right:
“Interest rates will always be lower under a Liberal govt than they would be under Labor”
(where the only way of testing this excellent hypothesis would be to have an alternative universe running side by side with the present one. Feh!)
Oh Dear
Now NSW is threatening to pull out of the Murray Darling back of the envelope waterplan on the day it is introduced into Federal Parliament because the Feds keep changing the goalposts.
hahahahaha – you think the government should just shut up and act like a government for a while, mark?? that’s so funny – it seems to me they couldn’t restrain themselves even if they really wanted to – they are just so out of control (presumably being totally true to themselves) – if ever there was a perfect example of peeps hanging themselves it’s the current crew’s OTT carrying on – i tend to agree with what phillip adams wrote a couple of days back in the government gazette; that the only chance the feds have got is if the main players shut up and let some of their backbenchers say something for a change – who knows, there might actually be someone who has true liberal values lurking somewhere there (but i wouldn’t hold my breath)
I’m quite prepared to shed a few tears this election night again, Liam, but there’s nothing wrong with “pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will”, to quote Gramsci.
Liking the look Harry!
Well, Liam you never know, I suppose, but Kevin Rudd does appear to be a tad more competent than Peter Debnam, and Morris Iemma was a new Premier, as opposed to been-around-the-block-10000 times John Howard, so the comparison with NSW may not be apposite.
Anyway, Centebet has Labor at $1.60 and the Coalition at $2.35 – very juicy odds, if you think your boy (sic) is going to win.
By the way, it was Howard who said interest rates were an issue, two days ago, when he risibly sought to pin the blame on the states.
And, Liam, had the opposition in NSW not played along by being a disunited, extremist and incompetent rabble, then that strategy would have failed. I would assert very strongly that Beattie would have lost last year if the opposition hadn’t imploded on cue.
Helen, that might be the most callous thing I’ve read around here for ages, unless through political tone deafness I’ve missed a sarcastic note. It’s also empirically wrong—the most marginal lenders and the low-documentation lenders aren’t necessarily the same ones.
Another factor that Liam, Playing the Contrarian conveniently overlooks is that the NSW government was never consistently behind in the polls for the 6 months prior to the election.
Nah, the Rodent’s screwing le pooch this time Liamista.
Having said that, I generally approve of ALP members going the underdog / talk-it-down route.
To all others, I say enjoy the polls! Revel in the Tories’ fear!
Even in the increasingly unlikely event of a Howard win, Id be professionally embarassed to look back and find I hadn’t rubbed it in while it looked bad.
Liam,
My contribution was observational not critical. I just don’t think the technique is particularly effective. (Polls may, in part, be reflecting a public aversion to all that hysteria).
More than happy for the Governmnent to keep it going!
I think it was Maggie Thatcher who said, “If you want to cut your own throat, don’t come to me for a bandage.”
Mark, I think your optimism of the will comes from a belief—one which you’ve expressed before many times—that when Governments in Australia lose, they lose big. I’m not sure this is an adequate source of hope for a change of Government in this environment, especially where as in Queensland over Council amalgamations, people are turning more and more locally for political identification.
Adrian, the other lesson of NSW 2007 is that voters defy press campaigns, anti-Labor ones in that case, and I think anti-Howard ones in this.
The Coalition is playing this exactly as I would, campaigning for 150 by-elections and praying for a Labor clusterfuckup. Knowing the ALP, I’m sure they won’t disappoint.
Izquierdista, I approve of the ’sing while you’re winning’ sentiment, but prefer it in football to politics. It’s far more spectacularly painful when you’re on the downturn again.
Nah, who cares about post-election RWDB vengeance and schadenfreude.
Been putting with up for at least 6 years.
And I will shorty be returning the favour!
Liam, most people in Queensland couldn’t give a stuff about the council amalgamations because they’re not affected by them. In terms of actual winnable seats where it may make an impact – Leichardt, Flynn, perhaps Petrie and Dickson. Noosa is in a safe Liberal seat. If there’s a swing on in Queensland, it is big historically. We’ll see, but I think you’re being too pessimistic.
Re: 7.30 Report last night with the PM
I notice there is only a transcript available and not the video due to a “technical issue.”
Perhaps they are editing the vision so that every time the PM’s shoulder twitches, you will be seeing a shot of Big Red.
If that’s the case, they’ll have their work cut out…..
Liam, I agree with you to some extent about the press campaign, but I think that it’s more nuanced than that. Perhaps it’s that in the NSW election, the press was running a campaign that was counter to public perceptions and as a result the hysteria was ignored.
If the press turns on Howard (which looks likely) this will simply confirm voters’ perceptions, and thus be be seen as a success. Like most good advertising, which is what ‘press campaigns’ really are, you are inevitiably more successful if you exploit perceptions that already exist, rather than trying to change them. Look how long it’s taken Volvo to convince motorists that they manufacture interesting and desirable cars.
Did “everyone here” on LP write them off? I seem to remember expressing the opinion that they were the originators of a string of clusterfucks who would nonetheless probably win because the Libs under Debnam looked like they couldn’t run a chook raffle. We ran with Indifference 2007 and Incumbency Rules.
I don’t think any of those currently apply to public sentiment regarding the Federal Election.
Your point as to the electoral effectiveness of emphasising local contests and demonising the opposition is well made, but so far the demonisation spins don’t seem to be working for the Coalition.
Helen said
I thought the line being run was that the interest rate rise is all the Labor states’ fault anyway.
HC, I am intrigued that you think ‘no disagreements ever’ is a terrible thing. Logically I can only conclude that you think warfare is a desirable norm, the blogospheric equivalent being spittle-flecked invective, insults, abuse and general willy-waving.
Besides, are you seriously suggesting that pro-Howard conservatives do not indulge in groupthink on these matters? “Normal” isn’t the opposite of Howard-hatin’ — the opposite of Howard-hatin’ is Howard-lovin’.
Of course there is broad consensus at LP about Howard; this blog announces itself up the top there as having a ‘left of centre perspective’, after all. Do you really think any of the predominantly left-of-centre LP bloggers or regular readers are likely to have been pro-Howard at any time — much less now?
Adrian, I think you’re trying to have it both ways. My view of the press campaigns, in the leadup to March against Iemma and in the leadup to November against Howard is that they do work reinforce pre-existing perceptions, good or bad, but that they’re not nearly as effective as traditional campaigning strategies, especially direct mail and contact with local candidates, in vote-changing.
It’s no good to simply campaign nationally and rely on an overwhelming swing to get the seats. Beazley should have won that way in 1998: what the Liberals did well then, and what they ought to be able to do now if they try, is run smart local seat campaigns against a generally mediocre field of Labor candidates. And, like the NSW ALP, the Federal Liberal Party is cashed-up and experienced.
We will see. I’m just saying, don’t be surprised when an incumbent Government with a significant majority scrapes it home through hard campaigning and marginal seat pork.
Really Pavlov try some Ginkgo.
The only two alternatives in this world are not groupthink or all out warfare. There is a third possibility – providing new information.
You can do better than ‘Logically I can only conclude…’.
Who said that groupthink wasn’t practiced among conservatives? Not me.
How would that affect the point I am making anyway which was a question? Why do it? Is it to reinforce your priors or to ward off doubt? Or just to deplete some of the planet’s limited pixel supplies?
Hmm, practising for the spittle-flecked etc, I see. Ad fem is not like you, Harry; I’m very disappointed.
No, HC has been correct before on numerous issues.
But HC has a better handle on the facts of the matter than I, a mere causal reader of his many perceptive lucubrations.
So, perhaps HC could remind readers about when he’s been right and you lefties have been incorrect.
And perhaps, also, HC could explain the many ways in which the ALP might fail between now and election day.
For once I agree with tigtog. The local focus saved the Coalition against a general swing in 1998 but there’s no repeating that now.
In any case, all politics may be local but local doesn’t imply either that people don’t consider national issues or that they’re agreed on local issues. With the probable exception of Noosa Shire folk, taking the local government example, I don’t believe that there’s any evidence that the majority oppose it, or care that much. Much of the protest is driven by National Party and local councillor self-interest. The plebiscites (which will probably never be held as they’re illegal under both Qld and Cth law) might produce some interesting results.
Psephological wisdom has it that an incumbent’s personal vote is high if it’s worth 2%. To what degree do local issues swing seats federally? Let’s not forget both parties play that game anyway, and many federal seats (particularly in the cities) have much less community of interest in the real sense than smaller state seats.
If Labor do get the sorts of swings in the various states that the polling is suggesting, crap like a grant or whatever to a local tourism biz will do the coalition no good. And there just are some limits to the degree that expensive Devonport style interventions can occur in each marginal seat (and the many not so marginal ones the polling is telling us are in danger).
“The Coalition is playing this exactly as I would, campaigning for 150 by-elections”
This is a good tactic if the election is likely to be close. Then, you can win a majority of seats with a minority of votes, like Howard did in ‘98, when he got 48.9%.
But of the coalition gets just 45% of the 2PP vote, which is what the opinion polls are saying, it will be impossible for them to win, no matter how good their marginal seat campaigning is and no matter how good their local candidates are.
The election will be closer than 55:45, but as long as Labor gets 52%+ of the 2PP vote, they will win.
Exactly. And with all respect to Liam, I think he’s falling into the error of assuming the dynamics of this election will resemble past Howard era ones. Some of us old blokes and sheilas remember what it feels like for Labor to win federally!
I should add that ‘98, the Labor only just won the primary vote, 40.1 to 39.7, with One Nation getting 8.4%. Labor got a quite a lot of One Nation preferences but mainly in seats they couldn’t win or couldn’t lose.
Newspoll has Labor ahead in the primary vote 48 to 39 and Labor is well ahead in the marginals. There is no sign of any localised effects holding up the coalition’s seats.
*Faints*
Well yes, if that’s what you mean by the Coalition winning and Labor losing. That’s about all I had in mind.
I’ll be honest. I don’t dare to hope.
I agree with Liam. The most I can do at this moment is hope to win the seat I’m working on. It will be devastating enough to lose that one.
I think it’s still safer to work on the assumption that Howard the clever politician will still do something that none of us are prepared for.
The computer thinks I’m Harry – it’s prefilled all his information. I don’t know what to make of that really.
Anyway, rates rise this morning. HA-HA. Bye Govt.
As I said recently Liamista, plenty of ALP heads I know feel exactly the same as you.
But like Mark, we older and creakier Gen X cats remember the 80s and early 90s.
Let me assure you that the ALP is permitted to win federal office under our constitution, has done so, will do so again – and this is the best chance in a decade.
I believe one thing to be objectively true: its now Rudd’s to lose. Rat cunning alone wont get Howard home this time.
Exactly: Don’t Fuck it Up, Kevin07.
Laura, It does the same to me though not with you but with others at LTU who read LP. Thank you for not posting something wicked.
Katz, I don’t want to make you feel bad about being wrong so often. You try hard and do your best and that’s all you can ask for.
On Labor failing.
Labor could fail if they don’t pick up enough marginals in NSW. I’ve been reading the Crikey guide (sprouked by Mark B) to the 2007 elections.
There could be an avalanche swing to Labor but I doubt it. There will be a swing to Labor and they should get 10 seats easily. But the remaining six won’t be so easy with a 4-5% non-uniform swing.
There is a huge swing to Labor now but everyone knows that there will be doubts on election day. Should we install this Laborite rabble as our government when things have been so good under JWH? Do we want Mr Reliable or Mr Magoo?
Beyond the safe 10 seats.
In Queensland hard for Labor to get more than a couple of seats, Victoria very hard to get more than 1 and Tasmania hard to get more than a couple after Bradden hospital intervention – but might backfire on Government . They might pick up a few in SA but WA doesn’t look good for Labor.
It boils down in my view to Labor getting a couple of the mortgage belt seats and a country seat in NSW. These outer suburban types are a weird bunch. They are ex Labor voters who are mortgage belters and have voted for the Liberals the last couple of elections. They are probably silly enough to switch back but I really don’t know and neither do you.
On current indications, Harry (and the copy for the Crikey guide was written back in February), Labor could pick up twelve seats in Queensland. Newspoll shows a 9% swing to Labor since the last election. That gives Labor 52% 2PP in Qld but don’t forget that’s coming off a very low base – that’s also worth taking into account when people start talking about swings needed.
Sorry, HC, I don’t know what you are referring to here. Perhaps you have proven me wrong some time in the past. I don’t recall the incident.
And is there any need to write so belligerently HC? I happen to agree with you that there are many ways in which the ALP can lose the coming election.
I’d recommend that you devote your energies combatting people who disagree with you rather than my good self.
Cheer up tigtog, one or both of us may be wrong.
Really, Mark? Antony Green once said that any mayor worth his/her salt should go into a State election with about 10-15% of the vote in the bag. If this is true I would love to see a Let The Political Careers Of A Thousand Soon-to-be-unemployed Councillors Bloom campaign as the Qld Nats have their vote pecked to death by a whole bunch of Bob Katter wannabes.
The pattern for this election is not against the last Federal election Harry, but the pattern by which Labor has won office across the states:
1. An exhausted (but not necessarily hated, bankrupt or corrupt) Coalition government loses by a whisker. In this case I think Rudd will win 85-90 seats at most, many by slim margins (20 seats
…less than 2%?
2. Labor governs conservatively, addressing long-standing issues but otherwise not being adventurous. Coalition get relevance-deprivation syndrome and discipline starts breaking down, but (along with disappointed Laborites) talk about the incumbent being a one-term government in order to prevent full-scale meltdown.
3. Next election: Labor look to be doing a good job, with both an explicit plan going forward and an implicit series of nods-and-winks to hitherto disappointed supporters that their pet schemes will have a look-in during the second term. Coalition have suppressed indiscipline to a point, but with that have also suppressed the capacity for wholesale reinvention and re-examination. Electorate goes Labor big-time, Coalition buried in landslide.
4. How does this end? We’re not there yet.
“WA doesn’t look good for Labor.”
Latest Newspoll by state (April to July) has Labor abd coalition 50:50 on 2PPP basis, representinga dwing of 5.4% since the 2004 election.
Admittedly, this is not as good for Labor as the other states (NSW 61:39 12.2% swing, Victoria 58:42 9%, Queensland 54:46 11.1% SA 56:44 10.4%) but still you could hardly say that “WA doesn’t look good for Labor”. On those figures Labor would certasinly in WA pick up Hasluck (1.9% swing required) Stirling (2.1%) and would havw a shot at Kalgoorlie (6.4%).
Though Labor wouldn’t need any seats in WA on those figures. It could pick up all thr seats it needs in NSW alone.
Sorry Katz, My poor attempt at humour.
Hmm Even the very conservative Tony Rutherford can see through Ratty’s Porking of the Marginals.
The Federal Government’s decision late last week to directly fund the Mersey Hospital in Tasmania, cutting out the State authorities and overriding the usual procedures, is not quite without parallel, but is nevertheless unusual, and in two ways.
It marks a fairly significant advance in the dubious art of pork-barrelling, an appropriately sleazy phrase for chucking money around in the hope of swaying the voter. This aspect is obvious enough.
There are serious problems associated with the whole idea — irrespective of the politics involved. It comes with all the usual strings attached to any new government spending. Notably, that such bright ideas tend not to have a one-off effect on the budget
Plus THe West australian’s Dead Tree edition had a Front Page Story on how the Govt is planning to target Marginal Seats with heaps of targetted funding.
Oh and the Heff is in deep doo doo again
Senator Ray says Senator Heffernan’s sense of humour could get him into trouble.
“Could he also confirm that Senator Heffernan has boasted that he impersonates Senator Barnaby Joyce… and rings Queensland constituents of Mr Joyce and asks them what they think of Senator Heffernan,” he said.
I wonder if Senator Heffernan is up for re-election ?
I must apologise to Graham Young. It was actually his post at Ambit Gambit which picked up on Rudd’s “election in six weeks” theme. I’d read it in my feed reader but completely forgotten where. Here’s the url, and the post has been amended accordingly.
http://ambit-gambit.nationalforum.com.au/archives/002194.html
Spiros, my mistake on saying Qld was at 52 PPP in Newspoll rather than 54. Been having a really busy day.
Andrew, 2-3% is my recollection from the pol sci literature – remember that federal electorates are much larger by population than most state electorates, often have less of a community of interest, and not as much scope (until recently) for porkbarrelling.
I’m sorry that I don’t have time to check references on it – but I’ve got a few more hours’ work to do tonight before I’m done, and then I’m going to be too tired.
Antony Green discusses the mechanics on when an Election can be held over at Poll Bludger.
Well I’m hoping the election is on in November and judging by Malcom Farr’s hints in the Daily Telegraph this may be the worst kept secret of election dates in history. Anyway they couldn’t have it before or straight after the APEC summit, what with all these foreign businessmen, VIPs and dignitaries needing entertainment and Ratty being a total sucker for strutting the world stage.
But actually November would be good. I could celebrate Ratty’s demise with a long hot day by the beach surrounded by reams of newsprint detailing the fallout, or failing that consoling myself with a trip to the movies and a nice long walk around Circular Quay. As it is, I’m loving the heavy drama on the political front right now – the drama, the uncertainty!
Downer gets tough on kids. Perhaps he’s been taking lessons from Captain Brough.
Meanwhile in the Wild West:
Some Liberals say if Mr Omodei’s figures do not improve by early next year, he could be replaced by the Party’s Deputy Troy Buswell.
The Liberal Leader says none of his colleagues have expressed any concerns to him about his performance.
No Paul, the real reason is you are a dope and the rest of the “Opposition” are a useless rabble.
Sat 10 november.
Sat 1 dec
Sat 15 dec
Any of these dates for an election would have a historic ring.
Meanwhile in WA:
It is interesting to note that the real reason Omodei is tanking it in the polls is because he, and other WA State liberals are such poor perfomers and frankly with the new one vote, one value changes to the voting system, will become long term members of the opposition.
hmm, double post – can someone delete the non linked one