Skip to content

Going, going….. still going…

05/02/2015


.
Tony Abbott is in deadly serious trouble. If he manages to survive a party room meeting or not, he is in deadly serious trouble.
.
First, lets deal with what we have here. Open talk of discomfort with the leader and the way the party are being lead. This is EXACTLY what happened when Julia Gillard challenged Rudd in 2010. Kevin Rudd opted to spill the positions, but he did NOT re contest. He did not have the numbers. The only person to stand that morning was Julia Gillard and she was elected Prime Minister. Of course by not contesting, Rudd paved the way for the speculation about how Gillard became prime minister.
.
And it happened again in 2012 when Rudd challenged Gillard and was defeated. Only then, the media did not talk about how great the defeat was, but speculated on the numbers Rudd had gotten and how many he would need to succeed.
.
Gillard was challenged again in March 2013 when Simon Crean was left looking like a dill for calling a challenge as Rudd did not contest. Again.
.
And of course it happened once again in May of the same year, only this time Julia lost the ballot.
.
Now the first thing you have to understand is the spin on spills is wrong. Way wrong. A challenge is not chaos. Its a act of democracy. You see, the only reason a person stays the leader of their party is through the support of their party. Once that support begins to wain, then that support is removed. A party leader is NOT an anointed king or emperor or dictator. They don’t get immunity from democracy because they were leader at the time their party wins an election. They are not entitled to being unchallenged. And that’s how democracy works. We, the people, elect local representatives. The VERY first act of any govt term is the entire lower house vote on who is prime minister. THEY vote. Not us. And if they have the numbers, they are the prime minister.
.
The way the two major parties do this is each party has a leader that THEY vote on. This person is the one they then present as their candidate for Prime Minister. And so the lower house vote. Democracy. Note. Members of the upper house do NOT vote for the prime minister. They elect a Senator who leads the senate in the upper house. Again. Democracy.
.
Now one of the biggest lies Abbott ever spun was the lie that the coalition were different than the ALP in the party room. That they don’t have leadership challenges. Shortly after winning an election, Abbott then had to witness TWO state premier challenges from the LNP. He still denied that it happens in federal coalition politics. And now we see that this too was a lie. It does happen in his party, and its happening to him.
.
Now what you want to do is nip challenges in the bud as soon as you can. Gillard would demand she be challenged if people had misgivings. She would never try and hide from a challenge. Or try and stop someone from calling one. If they had a concern they could not resolve with her by dialogue, then she called for the democracy of a party room ballot to clear the air, or to meet her successor. She left it entirely to her party to decide.
.
Abbott is different. If he wanted to end the speculation that has been going on and no doubt hurting their polling even more, he could have called a ballot. He did not. In fact he refuses to. Imagine that, a leader of a democratic country not willing to test his party’s support in a democratic ballot.
.
The ONLY reason this coalition spill has gone on so long is Abbott does not want a ballot. If he had the support of the majority of his party, this issue would have been resolved on day one with a ballot. But there is the thing. He can only look good in a ballot, if he has the numbers to win the ballot. And its my belief that Abbott does not have the numbers. The claim that he should be seen to lead unanimously can be reinforced by unanimous victory in a ballot. But he refused to hold one. Joe Hockey even claimed that Abbott doesn’t need to hold one. Joe ain’t very smart is he?
.
You see now the public have a case of Schrödinger’s cat. Schrödinger’s suggested that if you have a cat in a box and the box is closed the cat is both dead and alive. You wont know till you open the box. And without a ballot, Abbott is a Schrödinger’s cat walking. He may have his parties support. He may not have his parties support. You will never know till a ballot is held.
.
In the eye of the public, who were already turning off Abbott and his govt in droves, they now have to ask themselves does Tony have the support of his own party? Because if he does not, then why should I vote for the coalition when they have no support in their own leader. Its a Schrödinger’s catastrophe. And that is why Abbott is gone, he just doesn’t know it yet. And the more the party is lead by him, a man who does not have the support of his own party and a man who has disregard for the democratic ballot of a party room, they will not see a poll lift. But a poll decline.
.
And as decline grows in his popularity, it will only be a matter of time before somebody opens the box and we can find out if the cat is wanted dead or alive.
.

.

.
A. Ghebranious February 2015

Advertisements
2 Comments
  1. Sami permalink

    The challenge was in June 2013, not May. Also, Gillard didn’t exactly leave it up to the party. She had her henchmen (Conroy, Emerson etc) bully and smear anyone who suggested there should be a change in leadership. Still leadership by stealth not by democracy. Rather than put the party first, she clung to power and had the attitude of ‘if I’m going down, I’m taking all of you with me’. She selfishly and stubbornly clung to the keys to the Lodge, even when it was clear that approx. 36 MPs could lose their seats, BECAUSE of HER. She was a selfish, self-absorbed spiteful power-hungry egomaniacal narcissist. She should have done the DECENT thing, and put the party FIRST, and her over-weaning need to spite Rudd, no matter the cost to the party, last. She and her spiteful hatred of Rudd and her self-absorbed narcissism destroyed Labor.

    Gillard and Abbott are cut from the same cloth, both selfish, egomaniacal narcissistic power-hungry ‘me, me, me’ freaks. That the Libs didn’t learn from the damage that Gillard’s spiteful stubbornness caused Labor just means that they will go the same way at the next election. If they don’t learn what a PM who puts herself first before the party means, they will lose. I’m shocked the Libs haven’t learned from Gillard.

    • 2013 was after Gillard called position open. No challenge made by Kevin. The 2010 June challenge I refer to is when Gillard told Rudd she was calling a spill motion

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: