You might be overanalysing.
Give them a chance and see what they do.
The Abbott government outlined its priorities from opposition and during the election campaign and that's what the electorate chose over Labor.Maybe, but as they say;
"A man who misses his opportunity, and monkey who misses his branch, cannot be saved."
Hindu Proverb
But seriously, when in a precarious situation it's wise to never squander an irreplaceable opportunity.
I'd be more comfortable if he was more focused on the opportunities of tomorrow rather than the problems of yesterday.
Not IMO. All he has to do is what he is doing which is being a stable and no nonsense PM and then the population will realise that the massive scare campaign Labor waged against him was rubbish then he will easily increase the conservative voteAbbott needs to earn the maximum voter respect he can asap in the event a DD becomes inevitable.
Not IMO. All he has to do is what he is doing which is being a stable and no nonsense PM and then the population will realise that the massive scare campaign Labor waged against him was rubbish then he will easily increase the conservative vote
Yeah, me too... but from an analytical psychological perspective, eg like conducting an interview of a job applicant, one can usually get a good insight into what their main interests and motivations are and what they are capable of achieving.
To put it another way, the resume of the collective cabinet seems to be lacking for some key qualified and experienced potential, as I mentioned earlier, to transition from a can-do traditional (now getting antique) Howard style as opposed to more innovative and contemporary qualifications and outlook on life for the future.
This is one of the caveats the election result implied in the result, by routing the greens by 1/3 in the senate, but replacing with arguably less principled 'others' as a consequence of the 'traditional' often abused (now better by minority interests) than ever before optional above the line preferential vote.
So, you can see that "tradition", while usually espousing predictability, is often retrograde in terms of contemporary managerial and policy requirements.
Likewise, a poorly articulated resume with ambiguity easily leads to uncertainty and disappointment on perceived policy and managerial style.
While he tactfully made himself a small target during opposition, Abbott could have done much better in the cabinet selection to more quickly and completely shed his traditional persona of 'shifty' an 'head kicker' and transition to a contemporary leader.
To echo and re-apply the logic of the sentiments of Dennis Jensen MP, appeal to authority and appeal to consensus, especially in the absence of potential for the most qualified and contemporary management is not sound, scientifically, psychologically or administratively if you expect to be respected or more importantly, better respected than the alternative, as a leader of better government. He has to remember he didn't gain the voter support near as much as they chose to protest support the minors against Labor.
In a nutshell, he needs to get it... that he's been put on probation and needs to shine not only up to expectations, but above the alternative to maintain his job.
The danger he faces is if Labor re-unifies under probably Albanese, (less likely from a voter perspective for Shorton) he will face a tougher job trying to win over the 'Other' 7 in the senate to achieve anything (including abolishing the carbon tax) than if he stole the march with a smart, progressive and contemporary cabinet in the meantime. It appears the other 7 are probably more inclined to Labor philosophy and a re-unified Labor is more likely to entertain at least some of their key policies... thus providing all the ingredients that started the roundabout leadership uncertainty with Rudd and his frustration with not being confident in winning a DD.
Abbott needs to earn the maximum voter respect he can asap in the event a DD becomes inevitable.
Um, Whiskers, have you been taking lessons from one K. Rudd in terms of obfuscating language?That wasn't my belief. As I suggested it was implied that Macfarlane had the job (based on tradition)... but perception while not paramount, is important in the absence of clarity of the importance of science in a contemporary context.
I think there are three key points I would make here summarised from my rationale above.
Firstly, It's unwise to gauge your bar standard against the low standard of the opposition. The voter expects the bar to be as high as possible all the time.
Small government is generally perceived and accepted as a good thing. However, Small and traditional does not fit well for many contemporary voters bearing in mind contemporary has become trendy atm in terms of unfounded extreme beliefs such as climate change. The Cabinet needs to be very capable and effective as well. In the ministry there is an apparent lack of credible and capable scientific expertise to counter the significant climate change (attitudinal) tend perpetuated by elements of Labor. This is probably the most significant deal breaker in terms of which party people believe and respect atm.
Finally, Abbott has won the voter belief for now. He now needs to win their respect as well, hard, right off the bat, so to speak, to maintain his position and spare us more leadership changes. Repeating, the senate may be more difficult to negotiate than previously thought, and more likely to lean to Labor and welcome a DD... or even succeed in a vote of no confidence.
Abbott needs to very clearly demonstrate an appreciation of what is his Achilles' heel... voter dissatisfaction with the prospect of retrogate leadership... not just going back to divided labor, but also ultra conservative LNP trying to force in new laws that have not been fully or accurately presented (eg workchoices).
PS: It would be dangerous to presume the new minority senators would not force a DD this time. It's a very different scenario this time and some of the newer parties in the senate probably fancy their chances of increasing their representation with continued efficient lobbying.
...as a result of all seats being contested, it is easier for smaller parties to obtain election to the Senate under the Senate proportional voting system: the quota for the election of each senator in each Australian state in a full Senate election is 7.69% (1/(1/(12+1))), while in a normal half-Senate election the quota is 14.28% (1/(1/(6+1))). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_dissolution
Exactly. We do not want a repeat of the last six years of overblown language, vast rhetorical promises, and ultimate failure.The Abbott government outlined its priorities from opposition and during the election campaign and that's what the electorate chose over Labor.
Tony Abbott's gone from being deemed unelectable to PM and while his path was helped by a poor performance by Labor in government, he has surprised on the upside.
There's no doubt that government is a tougher gig than opposition. Getting down to business without too much noise is a good start in my view.
+1. The government has only been sworn in today. Yet Whiskers, Sydboy and others are determined to send them down in flames before they've had a chance to do anything.Not IMO. All he has to do is what he is doing which is being a stable and no nonsense PM and then the population will realise that the massive scare campaign Labor waged against him was rubbish then he will easily increase the conservative vote
.
+1. The government has only been sworn in today. Yet Whiskers, Sydboy and others are determined to send them down in flames before they've had a chance to do anything.
For heaven's sake, can't you at least give them a chance!
The Abbott government outlined its priorities from opposition and during the election campaign and that's what the electorate chose over Labor.
Tony Abbott's gone from being deemed unelectable to PM and while his path was helped by a poor performance by Labor in government, he has surprised on the upside.
There's no doubt that government is a tougher gig than opposition. Getting down to business without too much noise is a good start in my view.
Poor losers, we will beat their hides again next election if they can put a team together by then.
Um, Whiskers, have you been taking lessons from one K. Rudd in terms of obfuscating language?
+1. The government has only been sworn in today. Yet Whiskers, Sydboy and others are determined to send them down in flames before they've had a chance to do anything.
For heaven's sake, can't you at least give them a chance!
Poor losers, we will beat their hides again next election if they can put a team together by then.
Um, Whiskers, have you been taking lessons from one K. Rudd...
OK, Whiskers. I agree that usually you are. I'd even say you often write thoughtful, interesting posts which I enjoy reading.Absolutely not! In fact Rudd could have used a bit of good holistic advice (like mine) to be more effective in beating off his own party assassins and maintaining stability of leadership to tone down (or out) some of his policy positions.
Hmm... obfuscating: To make so confused or opaque as to be difficult to perceive or understand
Who me!?
Hey, hang on Julia... don't label this innocent looking little goldfish with those who wilfully expose their underwear. I'm clearly different!
Port assets are being eyed for sale by the State Government in a bid to restore WA's AAA credit rating.
After Standard and Poor's (S&P) downgraded the once-boom state to AA+ yesterday, the Liberal-led government said it would pursue asset sales to boost a balance sheet weighed down by mounting debt
Syd, if you ever want to knock over people in this forum, just say something positive. I reckon most here would faint on the spot.
Politics aside (both Labor and Liberal do much the same in this regard) I fail to see how selling assets which are profitable, or at least self sustaining, brings about an "improvement" in finances.Coalition goverments manage money better.........ops
State Govt eyes port sales after ratings cut
They are also trying to convince gas companies to "extract every molecule" of gas as quickly as they can, with most of it to be exported overseas.They want another million house with solar PV or hotwater over the next 10 years, and are willing to add a cool half billion on top of current schemes to achieve this target.
Got to say, doesn't sound like climate denialist Tony eh.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?