It’s the ‘let ’em eat cake’ attitude or as Grace Collier colours it ‘a shit sandwich’ and it’s neatly summed up in the first half a dozen sentences of this cut and paste….
“…On June 26, on ABC television’s Q&A, the panel discussed widespread voter disillusionment and voting trends against the main parties. Federal Liberal MP and panellist Christopher Pyne was asked directly: did he fear the political landscape changing against him, in a dramatic way?
“No, absolutely not,” Pyne replied, with the characteristic confidence we have all come to expect. “We have this preferential, compulsory voting. So an unhappy Liberal voter has still got to turn up and … do they put Labor ahead of me if they’re unhappy with me? And my experience has been, over nine elections, they don’t.”
In other words, our people have nowhere else to go; we can feed them shit sandwiches, they will obediently eat and stand in our corner — the stupid schmucks.
A week later, the phone pinged. Another MP: how angry are people really? C’mon he said, tell me the truth. Labor would be worse and everyone knows it, surely?
“No, they don’t know it, actually,” was my response. Who can prove Labor would be worse? And as far as sales pitches go, the “Labor will be worse” line is beyond pathetic. Besides, this government is worse than Labor because at least we know what Labor is; we expect higher taxes, wasteful spending and big-government intervention. But a Coalition government like this one is not a government worth having. “If a dog bites its master it is put down.”
About one thing only, Pyne is correct. At the next election, unhappy Liberal voters still have to turn up. But they don’t have to vote Liberal and this time, many will not. There will be other alternatives and some will even vote Labor, just to experience the glorious thrill of a reckless moment. However, well before the election, a crisis will occur. Within Liberal headquarters there will be gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands. There will be no money and no volunteers. Willing schmucks will be in short supply. From what I can gather, most Liberal voters intend to repay the party with the exact amount of loyalty, consideration and appreciation the party has shown them in recent times.
FULL COLUMN BELOW
On June 26, on ABC television’s Q&A, the panel discussed widespread voter disillusionment and voting trends against the main parties. Federal Liberal MP and panellist Christopher Pyne was asked directly: did he fear the political landscape changing against him, in a dramatic way?
“No, absolutely not,” Pyne replied, with the characteristic confidence we have all come to expect. “We have this preferential, compulsory voting. So an unhappy Liberal voter has still got to turn up and … do they put Labor ahead of me if they’re unhappy with me? And my experience has been, over nine elections, they don’t.”
In other words, our people have nowhere else to go; we can feed them shit sandwiches, they will obediently eat and stand in our corner — the stupid schmucks.
Two days earlier, the phone pinged with a text from the local Liberal member — an invitation to a function, for $250 per head, to hear a visiting minister talk.
Uh, gee, no thanks, we are “not inclined to give any money”, I texted back, “our taxes have gone up, our super has been smashed and now our bank shares, too”. Thanks for nothing, guys, I thought. The sacrifices would be worth it if the money was being used to pay back some of the national debt, but no, the debt continues to rise at an alarming rate and our contributions are simply funding higher spending, on wasteful boondoggles that are useless, or programs destined to be rorted that will no doubt send the country broke.
A week later, the phone pinged again. Another MP: how angry are people really? C’mon he said, tell me the truth. Labor would be worse and everyone knows it, surely?
“No, they don’t know it, actually,” was my response. Who can prove Labor would be worse? And as far as sales pitches go, the “Labor will be worse” line is beyond pathetic. Besides, this government is worse than Labor because at least we know what Labor is; we expect higher taxes, wasteful spending and big-government intervention. But a Coalition government like this one is not a government worth having. “If a dog bites its master it is put down.”
About one thing only, Pyne is correct. At the next election, unhappy Liberal voters still have to turn up. But they don’t have to vote Liberal and this time, many will not. There will be other alternatives and some will even vote Labor, just to experience the glorious thrill of a reckless moment. However, well before the election, a crisis will occur. Within Liberal headquarters there will be gnashing of teeth and wringing of hands. There will be no money and no volunteers. Willing schmucks will be in short supply. From what I can gather, most Liberal voters intend to repay the party with the exact amount of loyalty, consideration and appreciation the party has shown them in recent times.
Prior to the next election, the support base will not donate. They will not get up early to tramp through the streets and stand in public places, handing out flyers to annoyed strangers. They will not hold little cocktail parties in their houses and they will not buy tickets to party events. They will not work on election day, handing out how-to-vote cards. Instead, they will stand back and watch the drama unfold, and many will not be sorry when the government falls in a humiliating landslide.
The Liberal voter has been taken for granted, used and abused, suffered significant personal financial losses at the hands of the people they support, and many will take great pleasure in exacting revenge.
This is not to say that the government does not encompass good people doing good things, and there are achievements that have been made. However, broadly speaking, the Liberal Party has shafted its support base, a fatal error. It has broken the golden rule of classic union organising, a technique that Labor uses to great effect.
If we apply union organising theory to politics, the voters should be divided into three categories: the supporters who love the Liberals, the enemies who hate them, and those sitting on the fence. To win an election, the haters should be ignored, the supporters should be held close and work should be put in to win the fence-sitters over, so as to add their numbers to the base.
Unfortunately, under both Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull this has not occurred. In fact, it has been the exact opposite. Both of these leaders have been goaded by Labor using concepts of “fairness” (another union technique) into punishing their support base, which has seen it shrink dramatically. They have worked on winning over those who hate them, and ignored the fence-sitters. What we are seeing now is a classic union manoeuvre, and hapless political managers with no clue succumbing to its execution. ‘Labor’s worse’ won’t do