The Liberal Party - How long? - Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

You are even more shallow than the newspapers you endlessly defend.
It's the shallowness that determines the newspapers that certain posters read.

Circle Of Life Nbc GIF by Good Girls
 
Turnbull enshrined a lurch to the left of centre & the likes of Matt Kean are the current 'poster boys'.

Or
Turnbull stood still.
The rest of the party took a big step to the right making it look like Turnbull lurched to the left.

See 2016 Federal election where Turnbull effectively lost the Abbott majority of 2013.

The 2013 Abbott majority was one of many victims of the 2014 Abbott budget.


Then and now: the Abbott government's broken promises
 
Turnbull enshrined a lurch to the left of centre & the likes of Matt Kean are the current 'poster boys'.
The unpopularity of ScoMo was a big driver of the Teals vote (encompassing the treatment of women, religion & integrity). Dragging back that vote is unlikely to be one term.
Abbott threw away his majority with some insane decisions. Turnbull didn't lurch left, he essentially did nothing and then we had the corrupt lazy scummo that only seemed to care about the idiotic discrimination laws.

Scomo didn't help with Teals but Dutton won't win them back when he is putting all his time into his messaging with the voice (not a vote winner either way especially going no) and the Pharmacists.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Thats my answer. Refer to the review the party completed for its detail.

Its up to the supporters & members to address why it lost support.
Two more points:

1. The reviews don't mention a lurch to the left. That's your analysis, and you've offered no explanation as to why it is your analysis.
2. I'm a member, and we didn't lose support because of a lurch to the left, because that lurch never took place. The Turnbull Government was a thoroughly normal centre-right cabinet government who either implemented or tried to implement market-based solutions to issues of the day (the NEG for example). Considering it needed a popular nation-wide vote to implement same sex marriage, this puts it to the right of the Conservative Party in the UK who just legislated the damn thing.
 
Two more points:

1. The reviews don't mention a lurch to the left. That's your analysis, and you've offered no explanation as to why it is your analysis.
2. I'm a member, and we didn't lose support because of a lurch to the left, because that lurch never took place. The Turnbull Government was a thoroughly normal centre-right cabinet government who either implemented or tried to implement market-based solutions to issues of the day (the NEG for example). Considering it needed a popular nation-wide vote to implement same sex marriage, this puts it to the right of the Conservative Party in the UK who just legislated the damn thing.
I'm an uncommitted member of any party who makes my assessments free of ideological limitations e.g what the UK Conservative Party does or the President/ruling party in the US of A.

When one party stays in Government too long here, it invariably goes bad as we are seeing with Dan & saw with ScoMo/Turnbull after Abbott, who won office at the ballot box.

I accept you wanting to analyse every political policy & decision such is your right anywhere even on BF.

Democracy needs a strong Opposition party to hold a Government to account, not a domination by one party by default when the other lot are a rabble.
 
I'm an uncommitted member of any party who makes my assessments free of ideological limitations e.g what the UK Conservative Party does or the President/ruling party in the US of A.

When one party stays in Government too long here, it invariably goes bad as we are seeing with Dan & saw with ScoMo/Turnbull after Abbott, who won office at the ballot box.

I accept you wanting to analyse every political policy & decision such is your right anywhere even on BF.

Democracy needs a strong Opposition party to hold a Government to account, not a domination by one party by default when the other lot are a rabble.
More utterly irrelevant waffle-twaddle.
 
The moderates in the LNP are making the same mistakes that progressives do with conservatives in general. It's actually quite funny to watch moderates in the LNP get what they're usually dishing out.

The Right within the LNP are refusing to negotiate to a centre ground. Even when they make deals, the back-benchers never shut-up.

So the moderates in the Libs are making concessions. Turnbull had a plebiscite which gave the result we always knew we would get, and that the conservative back-benchers ignored and still spoke against the result.

So the Libs legislated for same sex marriage but receive no credit for it, because too many in the party were the only people vocally campaigning against it.

You can't negotiate with zealots. The moderates are learning this lesson just as the ALP always do, when they think about negotiating with the Liberals.

The irony is that the supposed people of conservatism and "values" are the first to renege on a deal when it suits them.

It's why I just can't see the Vic Libs surviving this. The zealots have too much of a foot-hold and are happy to take over the party from opposition. While the Moderates are trying to fight on two fronts, one internal, one external, because they actually want to win Government.
 
Well, there's a surprise, a comment which is not only meaningless in itself, but irrelevant both to the quoted post and the topic in general.
I don't know of another poster that writes more words without every actually expressing an opinion or even substantially addressing the matter at hand. Its like a bot that is simply programmed to interject, interrupt, divert and disagree while never actually saying anything.

Just like Steve Bannon said - flood the zone.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The Liberal Party - How long? - Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top