Australians have a chance to prove they're not all that bad - Opinion
Catherine Deveny has a column condemning one half of Australia for daring to have voted Coalition in the last few elections. It's truly eye-rolling stuff.
It's so easy to ridicule, I can't be bothered.
I will just make the point that she typifies what I have said for many years: those who support the Coalition generally think that people intending to vote Labor are simply unwise. A significant chunk of Labor supporters, on the other hand, think that those who vote for the Coalition are insanely stupid and morally depraved.
3 comments:
The good thing about compulsory voting is that people who have opinions that aren't strident and unbalanced are forced to vote so we aren't subject to the tyranny of zealots (ie members of political parties).
That said I was angry with John Howard for patronisingly reminding me that things would be different under Labor and it wasn't like returning an unwanted Christmas present. Really.
I can only conclude that his hubris is now such a bloatedly huge beast that he can only imagine people vote against him in error.
As I have told you before, John was quite a reasonable and balanced commentator when in the political wilderness. I'm sure he will be happier there in retirement sooner or later.
Geoff
Ah Geoff, it's funny what people take offence at. (Also, come on, you aren't one of the people Howard was really addressing, surely.)
I thought the reason he was saying it was entirely understandable. Recent polling shows his economic management credentials remain high, and his "preferred PM" rating has almost come back to Rudd's levels as well.
Rudd without Workchoices is presenting himself as a virtual Howard. Even Labor ads have been playing to the idea that its almost a matter of regret that people are going to vote against him ("sorry Mr Howard", says that modern whinging Betty ad.)
It therefore seems a likely explanation that swinging voters are really wanting to vote him out because they only want some relatively minor adjustments to the way things are.
Howard is warning people that it's not that simple; and I think it is a fair enough warning, given the above analysis.
I suppose I'd play it the other way. There are a lot of people who voted for Howard out of fear the last two times - fear of Latham, fear of migrants taking their jobs, fear of interest rate rises etc even though they despise Howard and Costello's mean spirited approach to government. That's why they paint a Labor party with no real left wing aspirations (sigh) as the raving looney ratbag party. More politics of fear to try and convince the people who have had their incomes reduced by workchoices that they have no choice but to vote for Howard.[Labor just as guilty of fear campaigns but with some excuse over the lack of transparency over extensions to workchoices]
The Liberals really do give the impression that they are born to rule and have the sole right to this privilege. Admittedly the Nationals are even worse with their blatant disregard for any semblance of good governance. Vaile has been a huge embarrassment to the government.
That said I wouldn't be surprised if Labor had a rousing percentage win but failed to get enough seats.
I'm going to a friend's party on Saturday night so I won't be weeping into my beer watching TV.
Cheers
Geoff
Post a Comment