Page 8 of 11

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 5:51 pm
by Crazy Dazz
Fat Side wrote:
Crazy Dazz wrote:
Mr Q wrote:Respectfully Ric, that's bullshit. What we're looking at here is the biggest swing against a sitting government in WA history. That doesn't come from one issue, but an electorate pissed off beyond belief. There was one seat with a 23% swing. Several more over 18%. That's a bloodbath. WA Inc didn't get that level of response. The Coalition were as rejected as any government has ever been.

You can dismiss things as "a few leftys", but you can be assured that the Liberal Party both locally and nationally won't be. Locally there will be blood on the floor in Liberal HQ. Federally they will be in a massive panic that this result is the canary in the coal mine.


The Coalition in the new parliament will likely be about on par with with Labour after the last election, around 19~20 seats.


The Libs will be lucky to get 15 seats

Yes they would, which is why I said "Coalition."

Although I must confess to some puzzlement over their addition. They say the Coalition will win 19 seats, but the Nationals 5 and Libs only 13. So not sure who the other coalition partner is?

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:02 pm
by MrWoollie
Mr Q wrote:
Ric wrote:Pity you couldn't apply the same test to your beloved Rudd and Gillard, who decimated the Aust economy to such an extent


The decimation wasn't done by Rudd or Gillard, rather by John Howard.

Oh, come on Q. Even you with your Corbynista politics cannot possibly believe that as a stand-alone statement.
I am the first to admit that John Howard did not use his surplus in any way the way he should have. Middle class welfare and tax cuts should have instead gone to infrastructure, debt repayment and money under the bed for a rainy day. And as for the f***ing baby bonus. A waste of money in every respect. Poor politics and poor economics.
BUT...
no matter how bad an economic job he did, he was not a patch on the wasteful mismanagement of Rudd. Rudd's ideas consisted purely of spend, give away, spend and give away. Everything that he did was both a waste of money and totally mismanaged. Insulation debacle was just one of many. Money for school buildings another. GFC handouts that his own economists told him wouldn't work, and after the first lot told him again that it hadn't worked and never would. That the money was either saved, spent on extra mortgage payments or wasted. Even Access Economics estimated the retained benefit to the Australian economy was a very low % of the money spent, and in fact was less that the interest payments accrued by the government on the handouts. So what was his response? Ignore everything everyone told him and do it again on a bigger, more grand scale. And then do it again. Talk about the ultimate application of the definition of stupidity (keep doing the same thing and hope for a different result).

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 7:34 pm
by farmer joe
Here's a question. What's the Liberal Party stand for now??
Their inability to argue the case for penalty rates cuts for small business, when EBA's mean penalty rates don't apply to large business, means I have lost faith in them. They have sold their soul completely to the corps. Happy to be told I am wrong...

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 7:43 pm
by Streaker
farmer joe wrote:Here's a question. What's the Liberal Party stand for now??
Their inability to argue the case for penalty rates cuts for small business, when EBA's mean penalty rates don't apply to large business, means I have lost faith in them. They have sold their soul completely to the corps. Happy to be told I am wrong...


This made me wonder why?

http://www.news.com.au/national/breakin ... a802388b13
Barnett tells PM to 'pick lower' GST floor

Colin Barnett suggested on Tuesday he would agree to a 65 cent "floor" if that was the figure proposed by Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull


Why would you give the option to the Feds to choose how low your GST should be?

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 8:54 pm
by Ric
Mr Q wrote:
Ric wrote:Pity you couldn't apply the same test to your beloved Rudd and Gillard, who decimated the Aust economy to such an extent


The decimation wasn't done by Rudd or Gillard, rather by John Howard. He squandered billions on middle class welfare during his time in office, resulting in a massive additional structural overhead for an incoming government - one they could do nothing about, as they had to counter the GFC as well as the side effects of that middle class welfare - namely that the average Australian had become dependent on it. Oh, and a lot less in the kitty to use to avoid the effects of the GFC - the much vaunted "surplus" that the Howard government left wasn't even 10% of what they could and should have left behind. But no, we had to have more and more bogan bribes to keep them in office (to put it in perspective, the Howard government was going to make private school fees tax deductable if they won in 2007....).

Whether or not Barnett could have avoided the deficit disaster that he led WA into I don't know. Quite possibly not. However, the Liberal Party have for decades made a point of how they don't run massive deficits, how they alone can balance the books and that debt and deficit is an ALP thing (surely you haven't forgotten the 2013 Federal election yet). The Barnett Government abysmally failed to do that. I'd also point out that he was a minister in the WA Liberal Government that accepted the GST configuration of the Howard Government, so there is no way that the ALP can be blamed for WA's measly GST share - it was all the WA Libs and the Federal Libs.

Anyway, the Barnett government is dead, buried, exhumed and cremated again, then the ashes dumped down the toilet. The swing in that election shows that the public thought they were hopeless.


The surplus wasn't even 10% of what it should have been hey? There was never that kind of money floating around even before tax cuts to have been a $200 billion surplus. You are plucking figures out of your bum and become number one lefty deflecting the blame of Labors incompetence. And even if there had been a substancial surplus, do you honestly believe Rudd wouldn't have squandered it? When has Labor ever left a surplus?

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Sun Mar 12, 2017 9:06 pm
by Mr Q
Ric wrote:The surplus wasn't even 10% of what it should have been hey? There was never that kind of money floating around even before tax cuts to have been a $200 billion surplus. You are plucking figures out of your bum and become number one lefty deflecting the blame of Labors incompetence. And even if there had been a substancial surplus, do you honestly believe Rudd wouldn't have squandered it? When has Labor ever left a surplus?


How about this then?

That's from News Ltd as well, so hardly a lefty institute. And written in the leadup to the 2013 election, where News Ltd were virtually barracking for the Libs on a daily basis.

Also unlike Rudd, who was attempting to keep the economy afloat during a global economic crisis, Howard was pouring fuel on to the fire of a massive boom period.

Howard was the most profligate, irresponsible economic wrecker in Australian history. Even Peter Costello, his own Treasurer thought he was going way too far.

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 7:32 am
by Ric
Mr Q wrote:
Ric wrote:The surplus wasn't even 10% of what it should have been hey? There was never that kind of money floating around even before tax cuts to have been a $200 billion surplus. You are plucking figures out of your bum and become number one lefty deflecting the blame of Labors incompetence. And even if there had been a substancial surplus, do you honestly believe Rudd wouldn't have squandered it? When has Labor ever left a surplus?


How about this then?

That's from News Ltd as well, so hardly a lefty institute. And written in the leadup to the 2013 election, where News Ltd were virtually barracking for the Libs on a daily basis.

Also unlike Rudd, who was attempting to keep the economy afloat during a global economic crisis, Howard was pouring fuel on to the fire of a massive boom period.

Howard was the most profligate, irresponsible economic wrecker in Australian history. Even Peter Costello, his own Treasurer thought he was going way too far.


Well Q, if the figures are correct, please accept my appology

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:10 am
by WCE06
Libs own fault. At the end of the day WA led the country bouncing Labor from office while Gillard and Rudd were laying waste to our economy. But with the Libs in their second term and multiple WA Libs in senior positions (including the deputy PM) they've achieved precisely zero rectifying the GST disaster at the heart of our economic woes. There's no excuse. Mark my words Barnett was a far better premier that this dick we've got now, but Turnbull/Bishop and co made his tenure untenable in the eyes of many.

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:12 am
by Mr Q
Ric wrote:Well Q, if the figures are correct, please accept my appology


No problems. Congratulations on that reply in a politics thread! Rare that anyone ever accepts anything!

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 9:36 am
by Fat Side
It is time for political parties to start responding to the electorate instead of more of the same old, same old. I include all sides of politics.

During the past 10 years Australian voters have significantly changed how they vote. 10% (and more) swings are common, whereas they were almost unheard of previously. The Newman elections in Qld are an example. The political parties continue to govern in the same way and either fail or refuse to respond to this. Governments continue to speculate why the electorate dumped them without canvassing the electorate. It is this arrogance that incenses the electorate. They fail to effectively communicate with voters (before and after elections) and a gaping disconnect is widening.

Parties need to be examining this and devising strategies to survive beyond one term.

While Turnbull blames Mediscare for their appalling performance and Barnett simply dismisses voters by blaming the landslide loss on 'it's time' they are learning nothing. Gillard/Rudd blamed the mining/carbon tax scare campaigns. PHON is blaming a scare campaign for the bloodbath they suffered over the weekend. While scare campaigns do occur, there is nothing new about them or the way they're responded to.

Until Political parties start listening and find ways to narrow the disconnect, this electoral volatility will continue and parties can expect one term to be the norm.

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 10:05 am
by farmer joe
Fat Side wrote:Until Political parties start listening and find ways to narrow the disconnect, this electoral volatility will continue and parties can expect one term to be the norm.

They govern for those that put them there. That wont change anytime soon. To many of the elites on both sides rely on the Popualtion Ponzi, which isnt supported by the electorate, for their future for change to occur.
The interesting bit about the WA election is the "bogans" moved and moved big time. They are the easiest group to spin. Ensure they think they will have money in their pockets and they will vote for you. Any talk of political process, medium term goals or plans and "economic" theory and they switch off.
The ALP has a huge job ahead. Good luck to them. We all need them to succeed.

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 10:22 am
by jourgo
Fat Side wrote:Until Political parties start listening and find ways to narrow the disconnect, this electoral volatility will continue and parties can expect one term to be the norm.


Don't know about that. One-term governments in Australia - anywhere in Australia - are rare. In my lifetime (42 years) there have been 4:

SA - David Tonkin 1979-82
Vic - Baillieu/Napthine 2010-14
Tas - Michael Field 1989-92
QLD - Campbell Newman 2012-15

Note: this is government, not party leader/PM/Premier

At a federal level there hasn't been a one-term government since the 30s. Bottom line is you've got to be fucking up royal to only survive one term. Even Gillard & Turnbull - on the nose though they were - managed to get their parties re-elected to second terms.

Re this election: I've voted Liberal all my life - and did this time around too. That said I'm not anything like broken up about Barnett losing this election. He'd lost touch, lost energy, lost focus, and wasn't going to last the full term had he been re-elected. My vote was predicated on the belief that Lisa Harvey would take over some time in the next couple of years.

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 10:38 am
by Total Package
Fat Side wrote:It is time for political parties to start responding to the electorate instead of more of the same old, same old. I include all sides of politics.

During the past 10 years Australian voters have significantly changed how they vote. 10% (and more) swings are common, whereas they were almost unheard of previously. The Newman elections in Qld are an example. The political parties continue to govern in the same way and either fail or refuse to respond to this. Governments continue to speculate why the electorate dumped them without canvassing the electorate. It is this arrogance that incenses the electorate. They fail to effectively communicate with voters (before and after elections) and a gaping disconnect is widening.

Parties need to be examining this and devising strategies to survive beyond one term.

While Turnbull blames Mediscare for their appalling performance and Barnett simply dismisses voters by blaming the landslide loss on 'it's time' they are learning nothing. Gillard/Rudd blamed the mining/carbon tax scare campaigns. PHON is blaming a scare campaign for the bloodbath they suffered over the weekend. While scare campaigns do occur, there is nothing new about them or the way they're responded to.

Until Political parties start listening and find ways to narrow the disconnect, this electoral volatility will continue and parties can expect one term to be the norm.


It's been 30 years now since a Government has been able to survive more than 2 terms.... I think that's pretty much just the way it's going to be from now on. Gone are the days of rusted on supporters treating Political parties like football teams they barrack for. Even my dad who has been Labor since he was in the womb voted Liberal at the 2013 election.

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 11:25 am
by domo_the_eagle
Are the state elections every 3 years or 4?

i swear i heard every 4 years, however i recall voting for the state elections in 2014 as i was going on holiday in march.

Re: WA State Election 2017

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:10 pm
by Fat Side
domo_the_eagle wrote:Are the state elections every 3 years or 4?

i swear i heard every 4 years, however i recall voting for the state elections in 2014 as i was going on holiday in march.


State is every four. Cannot call early elections, the full four must be taken.