The number of voters not tied to one of the major parties is now well over 50 per cent. You can see this by looking at the lowest vote recorded by each party (aorund 30 per cent in each case) and noting that at least some of those will be old-style swinging voters. These are still stuck in the two-party paradigm, but ripe for shaking loose.
I'm also thinking old-style swing voters aren't a thing anymore, therefore; which is maybe what you're saying? That sort of voter who switched between the majors based on some perceived promise or just out of a commitment to change from election to election (within the 2-party parameter)?
I’m confident old-style swing voters are still numerous, even if their numbers are declining. Loads of people don’t understand preferential voting and therefore assume that any non-major vote is wasted. Labor ran on this in 2022, saying “Only by voting 1 Labor can you get rid of Morrison”
WIIFM voters is probably another description. What's in it for me! I am guessing/predicting Albanese will have a few sweeteners in a Budget delivered before the election just for the WIIFM voters. March Budget April election is my prediction.
From your keyboard to Albanese's ears, Tim! As soon as he won in 2022 it was like I have to govern for the Conservatives so those that hate what Morrison & Dutton did to them will now vote for me (said in Gollum's voice with a very long eeeeee). Then I can have the Ring of Power all to myself. The Cracks of Doom is fast approaching. Where (or who) is Albanese's Sam character to save him from himself? Keating aka Gandalf has tried. As has Bob Carr aka Radagast the Brown. And Barry Jones aka Elrond.
As much as I don't think Albanese deserves a second term for the very reasons you have so eloquently described, a far right wing nut job government led by Dutton and Senator Ringworm ( the name Murri friends of mine in Alice Springs give Jacinta Price is white) scares the hell out of me. Would a coalition led minority government be enough to curb the worst excesses of Gina Rinehart's party?
I live in Maranoa so my vote in the Reps is void given its ultra Conservative nature. My vote in the Senate though, is where I can have some impact. Voting strategically in the Senate last election saw the back of the odious Amanda Stoker and almost toppled Pauline Hanson. As a consolation prize, getting rid of Malcolm Roberts would be a cause for celebration. If I was running the Greens I would put the bulk of my energies into their Senate tickets, and only on dead set certs for the House of Reps. This, of course, would effect the preference flow on for Labor but that would hopefully be replaced by preference flowing from Independent voters.
Nice cast of LOTR characters there, Juda! Wish I could play Peter Jackson!
A Dutton minorty govt is unappealing as hell, but it is possible. It would also be legitimate. But for it to be anything meaningful, the crossbench who support him have to still hold his feet to the fire. Not sure they have it in them.
Yeah you can be Peter Jackson. Who is Galadriel though? And yes how much clout would the cross bench have? Would Dutton's manipulations work on Jacque Lambie yet again? Naaah she is not Galadriel!
Osmond Chiu assumes without argument that a minority Labor government would be "weak and chaotic". The chaos in Gillard's minority government was almost entirely generated internally. The closest thing to an exception was her sellout of Andrew Wilkie (driven by Labor's eternal loyalty to the gambling lobby) which forced her to rely on the appalling Peter Slipper.
At the state level, minority Labor governments have done fine, arguably better than those with a biddable majority
Yes, I see no particular reason to think it would be chaotic: unless they cynically decide there's political advantage in that. Wondering what you think a Dutton-minority govt would look like?
Depends on what kind of minority. If they just need Katter and Sharkie, it will be pretty plain sailing. At the other end, if Dutton needs a lot more crossbench votes and he "doesn't do deals", he will find it harder than Labor would (assuming they dump Albo). That's because the Nats will be threatening from the (culture wars) right at the same time as the teals will be opposed. Nuclear power an obvious problem area here - the sensible thing would be for Dutton to dump it and blame a recalcitrant crossbench, but the Nats will hate this.
I can only go on what I see in the media (and I avoid MSM these days!).
They do seem to have some good media performers on the front bench that can hold their own and not get rattled, but (unfortunately) it will not be talent but the factions that decide.
Always thought Plibersek or Clare seemed to do well in the media and Parliament.
Also, it is hard to judge their legislative performance as I assume all the ministers have to follow Albo's agenda and can't go too off script (as per example below).
Plibersek has been a bit sidelined by Albanese as he knows she is his main rival. Thus given the Environment role and then getting overruled on things (e.g. the "Nature Positive Laws" she had agreed to with the Greens).
Anyway, we will find out if Dutton is the next PM (heaven forbid!) as no way Albanese can survive that!
Plibersek is another matter Albanese will have to answer for. He has treated her with immense disrespect and has probably damaged her beyond repair. Shocking misstep imho.
Albanese and his anti-Green or Independents stance is a huge part of the problem. Where does his timidity and do-as-little-as-possible - and his MeToo-LNPism positioning come from? His cruelty to asylum-seekers and whistle-blowers - and to Dan Duggan and family - his fawning over the Zionists and their hidden false-flag antiSemitism agenda - and of the US and its interference "buddyhood" - such an unstable behemoth - some parts intriguing - most parts concerning... why can we not have an independent and locally region-aligned foreign policy. Our RAAF and RAN is up there on China's very edge provoking incidents - and yet should a Chinese ship be anywhere near Australia (though hundreds of km off-shore - the heart palpitations - fostered by the rightwing press (ie all major media companies) - go into overdrive. Keep up these reports, Tim.
I find the anti-Green stance unforgiveable. Sure, they have their problems but to not realise they have to be part of bloc progressive solution is incredibly shortsighted. It's just insulting, too, to the large number of people who Vote 1 Labor 2 Green (or vice versa). Unforgiveable, as I say.
85% of Greens voters preferenced the ALP in 2022, the highest ever. That Alabanese has seen this happen and maintains his animosity towards them is beyond belief at this point.
Keep them coming TD - these are brilliant. I'm still trying to get my thinking into a model that has to encompass what you write so clearly but also issues like: Murdochracy/The Australian's diktat, why do they hold such control over Labor; Labor factions: isn't there just two -a L & R which party members have to subscribe to? One gets to put forward the PM & the other the DepPM which is why we get Albanese and Marles which is why we're stuck with AUKUS (would like to insert head exploding meme here); the only Labor MP not in a faction is Dr Andrew Leigh MP - I'm still trying to figure consequences of this out. & finally why do we tolerate career politicians who come with the legacy of duchessing by big corporations, favours, nest feathering before retiring etc. What you have written on sortition is seriously sobering. More writing TD - well done.
The media bias against progressives (those to the Left of the ALP) is to pretend that they don't exist. So when Albo announced that he supported the extinction of the maugean skate by the Tasmanian salmon farmers, because of the thousands of jobs, the media were not interested in the alternative view (AFAIK; there may have been coverage that I didn't see). For example Peter George, former ABC journalist is running in Franklin as a community independent opposing the salmon farmers etc, but has received very little MSM coverage.
You're right and this is part of what I've been trying to get at: the whole structure of two-party govt creates a framework through which we see the process and it necessarily hides alternatives. Media are hugely affected by this sort of bias. I mean, even in 2022, they barely acknowleged the existence of independent candidates and they have been dragged kicking and screaming into at least partial reframe ever since.
Labor was absolutely too smug, self-serving and timid to press their advantage. Sometimes I see lists of things that Labor has achieved in government and I think yeah, well, maybe but why didn't they make something of them? Announce them, give information about the financial benefits of a particular policy to a single person/ a couple with two children, etc.
And why hasn't Labor retorted to the LNP's preposterous nuclear policy?....'Peter/Mr. Dutton ~ I don't think that we have 15 or 20 years until this problem laden energy source materialises'.
The present ALP will die because they can't shake their pathological hatred of the Greens and they don't have a philosophy on which to base good policies. They did mention 43% carbon emissions reduction, by when? Was this based on similar countries in terms of population and the mix of mining and agriculture? Or was it just a number that sounded like it was 'scientifically' possible (50% is a bit drastic, eh?)
Labor used to be the leader in possibilities to make the country better and fairer but they've lost it.
After Albanese - who?: Marles?
They do have elites within the party. Did Shorten propose the end of negative gearing and the reduction in the capital gains tax during the 2019 election campaign? This isn't a bad thing but surely someone could have advised him to wait. After all, Howard declared that there wouldn't be a GST (can't recall which election) but introduced one when he got back in. You could properly think about it and assess whether people on middling incomes were affected more than the wealthy and adjust it.
Independents need to be given a chance. The best thing that could be done is for preferences not to be directed by anyone. It is a problem in the voting system for voters to have to number their preferences from the beginning to the end in order for their vote to count but it's participating in skullduggery to simply follow the recommendations of this or that candidate without a second thought
I find the htv cards helpful, just to clarify where the candidate/party thinking is: who they actually prefer. The recent Prahran by-election was interesting in this respect. I agree we should make our own preferences, but not everyone is that engaged, often for good reasons.
"Being a centrist small target ain't fuckin working.”
I have said the same thing but I put them centre right for economic policy. Everything seems to be market orientated instead of direct government action.
Good to see you digging out a bit of Gramsci. It’s appropriate given he wrote about the difficult birth of the new in the 1930’s and we are facing many uncomfortable parallels today.
All of us on the socialist left are extremely unhappy with Albanese and his ideological co-travellers. On that sentiment, we seem to be as one with the majority of Australians.
To think Albanese waited all his life (which has been dedicated to politics) and notionally championed the ALP ‘left’ to be the one to squander such a rare, perhaps once in a generation opportunity to prosecute a radical reformist agenda is deeply, deeply disappointing. No opportunity to put his foot in his mouth is missed and he is being outmanoeuvred by a blundering plod from Queensland. Yes, Dutton has the oligarchs backing his nasty, incompetent arse but how many free-kicks are the ALP going to give him?
Serious, systemic change needs to happen and sadly the current ALP, like their US Democrat and UK equivalents just don’t have it in them. As willing servants to a neoliberal order that is collapsing all around us, they are lagging well behind the zeitgeist and are leaving the way open to a populist window-dressing that simply conceals an oligarchs agenda.
If we can normalise the idea of minority govt, it opens up the possibility of even more progressive crossbench: that's the long game, I think. That only happens with community level organising, and that is a good in itself.
The media bias against progressives (those to the Left of the ALP) is to pretend that they don't exist. So when Albo announced that he supported the extinction of the maugean skate by the Tasmanian salmon farmers, because of the thousands of jobs, the media were not interested in the alternative view (AFAIK; there may have been coverage that I didn't see). For example Peter George, former ABC journalist is running in Franklin as a community independent opposing the salmon farmers etc, but has received very little MSM coverage.
I think you give Albanese and his party far too much credit Tim.
"It is hard to think of a government that has squandered more first-term goodwill in the name of a poisonous addiction to a small-target strategy aimed at getting the establishment to like them than that presided over by Anthony Albanese."
And yet Albanese chose to spurn the half million plus Australian petitioners seeking an inquiry into the murdochracy and the media, then gave unwarranted power to Dutton by "negotiating" the knackering of the NACC prior to its establishment.
With around 33% of the primary vote Albanese claimed a mandate to govern and immediately set about shafting the democratically elected cross bench.
The government led byAlbanese failed the Australian people when it elected to negotiate with the gambling lobby re gambling advertising, despite the scientific evidence of damage wreaked on society by gambling, and the demands from the public for a ban on gambling advertising.
The recent political funding bill cobbled together by the lablib uniparty is little short of the sale of OUR democracy to the oligarchs.
Recently the government passed a bill criminalising support for terrorist organisations. Providing support to a terrorist organisation means intentionally providing any support or resources that would help the organisation prepare, plan, assist in, or foster the doing of a terrorist act.
Albanese has described himself as a long term member of the Australian-American Leadership Dialogue, he is a strong supporter of AUKUS, and recently sent Richard Marles off to greet US Secretary of Defence, Hegseth, with a cheque for $800 million as a downpayment on a second hand submarine that our navy will never find the crew of 120 required to man it.
The fact that the USA, through the CIA, funded, armed and trained the mujahadeen in Afghanistan in an effort to deplete the soviets would seem to me to constitute support of a terrorist group.
The mujahadeen morphed into the taliban that branched off into Al Qaeda, and ISIS.
As Jake Sullivan reported to Hillary Clinton in his email of 12th February 2012, AQ (Al Qaeda) is on our side in Syria. The USA and Britain funded ISIS and Al Qaeda, for 12 years, in the regime change operation recently completed in Syria with the overthrow of the Assad regime. The HTS leader was the second in command of ISIS and now sits as president of Syria, with the support of Israel, the USA, and Britain.
Australias role in AUKUS, is to maintain US dominance around the globe, by preventing China filling its hegemonic status in the region. China, Australias largest trading partner, from 1979 to 2018, averaged 9.5% GDP growth. During those years China raised over 800 million people out of poverty, while between 1990 and 2022 figures from the Australia institute indicate that 45% of GDP growth in Australia was distributed to the top 10% of wealth holders in the nation. The ten percenters have grown wealthy beyond comprehension, while the average bloke has gone backwards faster than previously recorded.
Each month in Australia, another 10,000 citizens become homeless and the "social democrat" Albanese believes that Australia has an interest in war with China!
Albanese didn't set out to get the establishment to like him and Labor, he did what "progressives" in the USA and Britain have done, he sold his soul. He was educated by the neocons in the USA who believe a nuclear war is winnable, and wars make profits a certainty for those invested in the military industrial complex.
There must be lessons in history, and surely the regime change operations carried out wherever the USA disagreed with the current administration of any sovereign nation, eg Cuba, Congo, Indonesia, Vietnam, Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvadore, Haiti, Iraq, Libya, along with the results of the USA's export of "democracy", experienced by the populations of those nations, must indicate that the USA and its western allies will be recorded on the wrong side of history.
Our leaders need to spend more time thinking about who they pick to be our friends.
Might is not always right, and humanity and equality should be first in any consideration.
I don’t mind unpredictable and I’m not looking for any guarantee. The past is no longer working for us, and tbh, we have already lost 15+ yrs. So I’m happy to go out and dive into the deep; we have nothing to lose and everything to win, we just have to be brave (pls forgive me for that word!).
As for Albanese, I look forward to him losing any “old man of the party” authority he would have had otherwise. Going down as the man that stupidly pushed L into either minority gov or into opposition is all he deserves. I have no doubt he’ll be “burning” inside after his political life, because he’ll be useless to anyone. I just cannot see him having a life as a powerbroker or lobbyist, no one will likely want to be associated with him.
"His approach is frankly suicidal". Not exactly. If Labor loses its majority, Albanese will be toast, both by virtue of having lost and because he is so obviously unsuitable for minority government. So to the extent he can influence anything, his best personal strategy is to double down.
Chalmers doesn't seem to have much of the Labor tribalism that defines Albanese, and won't be bound by Albanese's promises not to govern in minority. Here's hoping!
The number of voters not tied to one of the major parties is now well over 50 per cent. You can see this by looking at the lowest vote recorded by each party (aorund 30 per cent in each case) and noting that at least some of those will be old-style swinging voters. These are still stuck in the two-party paradigm, but ripe for shaking loose.
Thanks, I'll update my description (and brain).
I'm also thinking old-style swing voters aren't a thing anymore, therefore; which is maybe what you're saying? That sort of voter who switched between the majors based on some perceived promise or just out of a commitment to change from election to election (within the 2-party parameter)?
I’m confident old-style swing voters are still numerous, even if their numbers are declining. Loads of people don’t understand preferential voting and therefore assume that any non-major vote is wasted. Labor ran on this in 2022, saying “Only by voting 1 Labor can you get rid of Morrison”
WIIFM voters is probably another description. What's in it for me! I am guessing/predicting Albanese will have a few sweeteners in a Budget delivered before the election just for the WIIFM voters. March Budget April election is my prediction.
From your keyboard to Albanese's ears, Tim! As soon as he won in 2022 it was like I have to govern for the Conservatives so those that hate what Morrison & Dutton did to them will now vote for me (said in Gollum's voice with a very long eeeeee). Then I can have the Ring of Power all to myself. The Cracks of Doom is fast approaching. Where (or who) is Albanese's Sam character to save him from himself? Keating aka Gandalf has tried. As has Bob Carr aka Radagast the Brown. And Barry Jones aka Elrond.
As much as I don't think Albanese deserves a second term for the very reasons you have so eloquently described, a far right wing nut job government led by Dutton and Senator Ringworm ( the name Murri friends of mine in Alice Springs give Jacinta Price is white) scares the hell out of me. Would a coalition led minority government be enough to curb the worst excesses of Gina Rinehart's party?
I live in Maranoa so my vote in the Reps is void given its ultra Conservative nature. My vote in the Senate though, is where I can have some impact. Voting strategically in the Senate last election saw the back of the odious Amanda Stoker and almost toppled Pauline Hanson. As a consolation prize, getting rid of Malcolm Roberts would be a cause for celebration. If I was running the Greens I would put the bulk of my energies into their Senate tickets, and only on dead set certs for the House of Reps. This, of course, would effect the preference flow on for Labor but that would hopefully be replaced by preference flowing from Independent voters.
Nice cast of LOTR characters there, Juda! Wish I could play Peter Jackson!
A Dutton minorty govt is unappealing as hell, but it is possible. It would also be legitimate. But for it to be anything meaningful, the crossbench who support him have to still hold his feet to the fire. Not sure they have it in them.
Yeah you can be Peter Jackson. Who is Galadriel though? And yes how much clout would the cross bench have? Would Dutton's manipulations work on Jacque Lambie yet again? Naaah she is not Galadriel!
Keating aka Gandalf?? Very, very kind to him.
So who would you pick?
Osmond Chiu assumes without argument that a minority Labor government would be "weak and chaotic". The chaos in Gillard's minority government was almost entirely generated internally. The closest thing to an exception was her sellout of Andrew Wilkie (driven by Labor's eternal loyalty to the gambling lobby) which forced her to rely on the appalling Peter Slipper.
At the state level, minority Labor governments have done fine, arguably better than those with a biddable majority
Yes, I see no particular reason to think it would be chaotic: unless they cynically decide there's political advantage in that. Wondering what you think a Dutton-minority govt would look like?
Depends on what kind of minority. If they just need Katter and Sharkie, it will be pretty plain sailing. At the other end, if Dutton needs a lot more crossbench votes and he "doesn't do deals", he will find it harder than Labor would (assuming they dump Albo). That's because the Nats will be threatening from the (culture wars) right at the same time as the teals will be opposed. Nuclear power an obvious problem area here - the sensible thing would be for Dutton to dump it and blame a recalcitrant crossbench, but the Nats will hate this.
I am just so pessimistic about politics here and overseas. :(
As you mentioned, Albo is mired in the past. His politics may have worked in the Hawke/Keating era, but not now.
Being a hopeless media performer doesn't help either.
All true. Any thoughts on who in the current team could replace him? I even struggle with that.
I can only go on what I see in the media (and I avoid MSM these days!).
They do seem to have some good media performers on the front bench that can hold their own and not get rattled, but (unfortunately) it will not be talent but the factions that decide.
Always thought Plibersek or Clare seemed to do well in the media and Parliament.
Also, it is hard to judge their legislative performance as I assume all the ministers have to follow Albo's agenda and can't go too off script (as per example below).
Plibersek has been a bit sidelined by Albanese as he knows she is his main rival. Thus given the Environment role and then getting overruled on things (e.g. the "Nature Positive Laws" she had agreed to with the Greens).
Anyway, we will find out if Dutton is the next PM (heaven forbid!) as no way Albanese can survive that!
Plibersek is another matter Albanese will have to answer for. He has treated her with immense disrespect and has probably damaged her beyond repair. Shocking misstep imho.
Albanese and his anti-Green or Independents stance is a huge part of the problem. Where does his timidity and do-as-little-as-possible - and his MeToo-LNPism positioning come from? His cruelty to asylum-seekers and whistle-blowers - and to Dan Duggan and family - his fawning over the Zionists and their hidden false-flag antiSemitism agenda - and of the US and its interference "buddyhood" - such an unstable behemoth - some parts intriguing - most parts concerning... why can we not have an independent and locally region-aligned foreign policy. Our RAAF and RAN is up there on China's very edge provoking incidents - and yet should a Chinese ship be anywhere near Australia (though hundreds of km off-shore - the heart palpitations - fostered by the rightwing press (ie all major media companies) - go into overdrive. Keep up these reports, Tim.
I find the anti-Green stance unforgiveable. Sure, they have their problems but to not realise they have to be part of bloc progressive solution is incredibly shortsighted. It's just insulting, too, to the large number of people who Vote 1 Labor 2 Green (or vice versa). Unforgiveable, as I say.
I'm the vice versa! Since my return from many years in Japan.
85% of Greens voters preferenced the ALP in 2022, the highest ever. That Alabanese has seen this happen and maintains his animosity towards them is beyond belief at this point.
And I'm beginning to take that animus from Albanese quite personally...
Just sticking this article by Arthur Sinodenis to add more flesh to this great conversation.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/feb/16/donald-trump-relationship-australian-leaders-anthony-albanese-peter-dutton
Thanks for the link: I hadn't seen this.
Keep them coming TD - these are brilliant. I'm still trying to get my thinking into a model that has to encompass what you write so clearly but also issues like: Murdochracy/The Australian's diktat, why do they hold such control over Labor; Labor factions: isn't there just two -a L & R which party members have to subscribe to? One gets to put forward the PM & the other the DepPM which is why we get Albanese and Marles which is why we're stuck with AUKUS (would like to insert head exploding meme here); the only Labor MP not in a faction is Dr Andrew Leigh MP - I'm still trying to figure consequences of this out. & finally why do we tolerate career politicians who come with the legacy of duchessing by big corporations, favours, nest feathering before retiring etc. What you have written on sortition is seriously sobering. More writing TD - well done.
Glad you mention the factions, Gavin. I'm working on something about that atm. Hugely overlooked part of the discussion.
The media bias against progressives (those to the Left of the ALP) is to pretend that they don't exist. So when Albo announced that he supported the extinction of the maugean skate by the Tasmanian salmon farmers, because of the thousands of jobs, the media were not interested in the alternative view (AFAIK; there may have been coverage that I didn't see). For example Peter George, former ABC journalist is running in Franklin as a community independent opposing the salmon farmers etc, but has received very little MSM coverage.
You're right and this is part of what I've been trying to get at: the whole structure of two-party govt creates a framework through which we see the process and it necessarily hides alternatives. Media are hugely affected by this sort of bias. I mean, even in 2022, they barely acknowleged the existence of independent candidates and they have been dragged kicking and screaming into at least partial reframe ever since.
Labor was absolutely too smug, self-serving and timid to press their advantage. Sometimes I see lists of things that Labor has achieved in government and I think yeah, well, maybe but why didn't they make something of them? Announce them, give information about the financial benefits of a particular policy to a single person/ a couple with two children, etc.
And why hasn't Labor retorted to the LNP's preposterous nuclear policy?....'Peter/Mr. Dutton ~ I don't think that we have 15 or 20 years until this problem laden energy source materialises'.
The present ALP will die because they can't shake their pathological hatred of the Greens and they don't have a philosophy on which to base good policies. They did mention 43% carbon emissions reduction, by when? Was this based on similar countries in terms of population and the mix of mining and agriculture? Or was it just a number that sounded like it was 'scientifically' possible (50% is a bit drastic, eh?)
Labor used to be the leader in possibilities to make the country better and fairer but they've lost it.
After Albanese - who?: Marles?
They do have elites within the party. Did Shorten propose the end of negative gearing and the reduction in the capital gains tax during the 2019 election campaign? This isn't a bad thing but surely someone could have advised him to wait. After all, Howard declared that there wouldn't be a GST (can't recall which election) but introduced one when he got back in. You could properly think about it and assess whether people on middling incomes were affected more than the wealthy and adjust it.
Independents need to be given a chance. The best thing that could be done is for preferences not to be directed by anyone. It is a problem in the voting system for voters to have to number their preferences from the beginning to the end in order for their vote to count but it's participating in skullduggery to simply follow the recommendations of this or that candidate without a second thought
I find the htv cards helpful, just to clarify where the candidate/party thinking is: who they actually prefer. The recent Prahran by-election was interesting in this respect. I agree we should make our own preferences, but not everyone is that engaged, often for good reasons.
Yes, HTVs can be as useful a guide on how _not_ to vote as to how to vote.
Although they are no longer as important as they were when it was illegal for the ballots to display candidates' party affiliations.
"Being a centrist small target ain't fuckin working.”
I have said the same thing but I put them centre right for economic policy. Everything seems to be market orientated instead of direct government action.
They are absolutely a party of neoliberalism. Perhaps in pursuit of progressive ends, but via market means.
Right on the money, Tim.
Good to see you digging out a bit of Gramsci. It’s appropriate given he wrote about the difficult birth of the new in the 1930’s and we are facing many uncomfortable parallels today.
All of us on the socialist left are extremely unhappy with Albanese and his ideological co-travellers. On that sentiment, we seem to be as one with the majority of Australians.
To think Albanese waited all his life (which has been dedicated to politics) and notionally championed the ALP ‘left’ to be the one to squander such a rare, perhaps once in a generation opportunity to prosecute a radical reformist agenda is deeply, deeply disappointing. No opportunity to put his foot in his mouth is missed and he is being outmanoeuvred by a blundering plod from Queensland. Yes, Dutton has the oligarchs backing his nasty, incompetent arse but how many free-kicks are the ALP going to give him?
Serious, systemic change needs to happen and sadly the current ALP, like their US Democrat and UK equivalents just don’t have it in them. As willing servants to a neoliberal order that is collapsing all around us, they are lagging well behind the zeitgeist and are leaving the way open to a populist window-dressing that simply conceals an oligarchs agenda.
If we can normalise the idea of minority govt, it opens up the possibility of even more progressive crossbench: that's the long game, I think. That only happens with community level organising, and that is a good in itself.
The media bias against progressives (those to the Left of the ALP) is to pretend that they don't exist. So when Albo announced that he supported the extinction of the maugean skate by the Tasmanian salmon farmers, because of the thousands of jobs, the media were not interested in the alternative view (AFAIK; there may have been coverage that I didn't see). For example Peter George, former ABC journalist is running in Franklin as a community independent opposing the salmon farmers etc, but has received very little MSM coverage.
I think you give Albanese and his party far too much credit Tim.
"It is hard to think of a government that has squandered more first-term goodwill in the name of a poisonous addiction to a small-target strategy aimed at getting the establishment to like them than that presided over by Anthony Albanese."
And yet Albanese chose to spurn the half million plus Australian petitioners seeking an inquiry into the murdochracy and the media, then gave unwarranted power to Dutton by "negotiating" the knackering of the NACC prior to its establishment.
With around 33% of the primary vote Albanese claimed a mandate to govern and immediately set about shafting the democratically elected cross bench.
The government led byAlbanese failed the Australian people when it elected to negotiate with the gambling lobby re gambling advertising, despite the scientific evidence of damage wreaked on society by gambling, and the demands from the public for a ban on gambling advertising.
The recent political funding bill cobbled together by the lablib uniparty is little short of the sale of OUR democracy to the oligarchs.
Recently the government passed a bill criminalising support for terrorist organisations. Providing support to a terrorist organisation means intentionally providing any support or resources that would help the organisation prepare, plan, assist in, or foster the doing of a terrorist act.
Albanese has described himself as a long term member of the Australian-American Leadership Dialogue, he is a strong supporter of AUKUS, and recently sent Richard Marles off to greet US Secretary of Defence, Hegseth, with a cheque for $800 million as a downpayment on a second hand submarine that our navy will never find the crew of 120 required to man it.
The fact that the USA, through the CIA, funded, armed and trained the mujahadeen in Afghanistan in an effort to deplete the soviets would seem to me to constitute support of a terrorist group.
The mujahadeen morphed into the taliban that branched off into Al Qaeda, and ISIS.
As Jake Sullivan reported to Hillary Clinton in his email of 12th February 2012, AQ (Al Qaeda) is on our side in Syria. The USA and Britain funded ISIS and Al Qaeda, for 12 years, in the regime change operation recently completed in Syria with the overthrow of the Assad regime. The HTS leader was the second in command of ISIS and now sits as president of Syria, with the support of Israel, the USA, and Britain.
Australias role in AUKUS, is to maintain US dominance around the globe, by preventing China filling its hegemonic status in the region. China, Australias largest trading partner, from 1979 to 2018, averaged 9.5% GDP growth. During those years China raised over 800 million people out of poverty, while between 1990 and 2022 figures from the Australia institute indicate that 45% of GDP growth in Australia was distributed to the top 10% of wealth holders in the nation. The ten percenters have grown wealthy beyond comprehension, while the average bloke has gone backwards faster than previously recorded.
Each month in Australia, another 10,000 citizens become homeless and the "social democrat" Albanese believes that Australia has an interest in war with China!
Albanese didn't set out to get the establishment to like him and Labor, he did what "progressives" in the USA and Britain have done, he sold his soul. He was educated by the neocons in the USA who believe a nuclear war is winnable, and wars make profits a certainty for those invested in the military industrial complex.
There must be lessons in history, and surely the regime change operations carried out wherever the USA disagreed with the current administration of any sovereign nation, eg Cuba, Congo, Indonesia, Vietnam, Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvadore, Haiti, Iraq, Libya, along with the results of the USA's export of "democracy", experienced by the populations of those nations, must indicate that the USA and its western allies will be recorded on the wrong side of history.
Our leaders need to spend more time thinking about who they pick to be our friends.
Might is not always right, and humanity and equality should be first in any consideration.
I don’t mind unpredictable and I’m not looking for any guarantee. The past is no longer working for us, and tbh, we have already lost 15+ yrs. So I’m happy to go out and dive into the deep; we have nothing to lose and everything to win, we just have to be brave (pls forgive me for that word!).
As for Albanese, I look forward to him losing any “old man of the party” authority he would have had otherwise. Going down as the man that stupidly pushed L into either minority gov or into opposition is all he deserves. I have no doubt he’ll be “burning” inside after his political life, because he’ll be useless to anyone. I just cannot see him having a life as a powerbroker or lobbyist, no one will likely want to be associated with him.
"His approach is frankly suicidal". Not exactly. If Labor loses its majority, Albanese will be toast, both by virtue of having lost and because he is so obviously unsuitable for minority government. So to the extent he can influence anything, his best personal strategy is to double down.
Chalmers doesn't seem to have much of the Labor tribalism that defines Albanese, and won't be bound by Albanese's promises not to govern in minority. Here's hoping!