What happened? Why did Abbott win?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

Did rural Queensland turn out in large numbers?

[enlightenment]

1. I can't speak with any expertise,

but I was reading that many, many people have been upset with the carbon tax - among other things.

[blkmusclmachine]

2. Who counted the votes?

That's all that matters.

[Ken Burch]

3. Well, Labor ran a horrible campaign, for one thing.

They are still hopelessly bound to proto-Blairism, which means they no longer have anything to offer anybody.

People vote Labor now solely out of habit.

It would be interesting to see how a well-organized challenge to Labor from the Left might have done.

[Ken Burch]

4. The vote share swing to the Liberal/National coalition was actually quite small.

Last edited Sun Sep 8, 2013, 07:54 PM - Edit history (1)

It looks like the party that made the biggest gains was the Palmer United Party, a vanity project of Queensland mining executive Clive Palmer(who, personally, seems to have actually managed to win a seat for the party in Queensland).

The Green vote fell, probably because people felt that they were responsible for the carbon tax on mining and that this tax was responsible for job losses.++++++++++++++++++

[Viva]

5. Abbott's acceptance speech

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-09-07/tony-abbott-claims-coalition-election-victory/4943680

He promises to end the boats coming (refugees) and end the carbon tax.

When the exchange rate changed, prices of imports have not decreased and from what my relatives over there have said, the cost of things has been a worry. Not sure how this affects anything, but labour does need to regroup.

Even the language of Australians is all about fairness, a fair go, of instance. In this election period, I have even heard Abbott use these words. And yet, in the above speech, he says "australia is open for business." Such speak from a member of the Liberal party usually means good for business owners, not so much for the workers. I definitely have a wait and see attitude. As an optimist I am always ready to be surprised.

The interesting thing to me is that the northern Territory went labor.....perhaps I have lived in the USA too long, but I am yest to understand this, unless Ketter's Australian party had labour as their preferences.

[Matilda]

7. N.T. seats are likely to remain unchanged.

There was a small swing away from Labor in Lingiari, but the ALP has retained it; and the swing to the ALP in Solomon is probably not enough for it to change hands away from the CLP - it's still in doubt. So it's likely to end up the same in the Territory.

Katter's party didn't field any candidates in the N.T.

[anakie]

6. reasons

1st and foremost, the MSM and especially the Murdoch press's unwaivering support of all things LNP/Tony Abbott and unrelenting criticism of Labor. Facts be damned seemed to be their modus operandi.

2. Kevin Rudd's destabilisation of the party and of Julia Gillard over the course of the last 3 years.

3. Rudd actually believing his own publicity that he is the chosen one in conjunction with a very poorly run presidential style caampaign - effectively wiping out the last 3 years achievements under Julia Gillard.

We now have 3 years, most likely 6 years to see how Abbott and his conservative/reactionary party can run the show. He starts from a pretty decent base - let's see how long it takes for him to fuck it up.

I'd like to see Tanya Plibersek take over the ledership but she won't. Wrong sex for a start. Shorten should not be rewarded; neither should Albanese but at least he will be able to stand toe to toe with Abbott. I hope Labor is as negative towards Abbott as he was to them.

Tony Abbott - Australia's answer to GWB.

[Matilda]

8. It can't all be laid at Rudd's door.

Last edited Sun Sep 8, 2013, 12:58 AM - Edit history (1)

The Labor slide began with Rudd, but it was his lack of courage in not going to a double dissolution over the introduction of his Emissions Trading Scheme that began the rot. All the signs were that he would have won; we would have had a sensible trading scheme in place, and the public wouldn't have lost faith in him. And the door wouldn't have opened to allow a campaign by the Libs and Murdoch against any form of carbon pricing, which in itself is a very necessary tool to deal with global warming.

But I can't agree that he was responsible for the chaos – that was the move against him by Gillard and the right-wing. Only the most serious offence – like a major civil crime or declaring war on New Zealand – could ever justifiy removing a sitting leader, and Labor has acknowledged that by backing Rudd's recent changes to ensure that it can't easily happen again.

Never mind the personalities – nobody thought about the damage to the Labor brand when they rolled Rudd – the problems could have been handled differently, behind closed doors, and in a way that ensured that at least a façade of stability was retained.

And for that reason, I hope that the leadership will go, at least in the short term, to Anthony Albanese. He played a straight hand all the way through; he told Gillard that he couldn't support her when Rudd challenged because he didn't believe a sitting leader should be removed without due cause. It had nothing to do with either leader personally; it was a matter of principle , and Albanese chose to support the original leader all the way through. He was never guilty of treachery. Gillard accepted his reasons and declined to agree to his resignation.

Albanese is a formidable parliamentary performer and well able to take the fight to Abbott. And perhaps equally importantly, he is liked by both the left and right wings of the party, and what Labor needs most now is unity.

Edit: sp.