I’ve been a bit hesitant to write anything over the fiasco of this week – when Kevin Andrews calls for a spill to run for the leadership and over 40% of the party room supports him, the time for any sort of rational analysis has long since bolted.
The other problem here is that good info is hard to identify because most of the political sources that are speaking are doing so to bolster their own side of the split – usually contradicting other leaking politicians.
Consider the info being spruiked so far: Abbott has the numbers, no Hockey has the numbers, no Turnbull has the numbers, no Hockey has the numbers if Abbot stands aside and gets the Treasury, no there’s not a majority willing to call for a spill because a critical number of people don’t trust who would actually end up running in any head to head contest etc etc.
What we do know however is that Turnbull is right when he says that a Coalition diving head first down the climate denialist shute would get their arses kicked six ways to Sunday in any election. The Newspoll analysis in The Oz today says as much and is completely consistent with what we’ve seen come out of Morgan and Essential Report over the last 6 months or so.
What is an interesting piece of food for thought is that the seats likely to be lost by the Coalition in any swing against them are more likely to be held by broad moderates than broad conservatives. If we nominally label each Coalition member as either moderate or conservative and look at what happens to the ratio of conservatives to moderates in the Coalition party room as the swing against the Opposition increases, this is what we get:
As the number of seats the Coalition would lose at an election increases (based on the standard pendulum), the proportion of the remaining party room considered conservative increases.
It’s mostly moderates that hold fair dinkum contestable swing seats – because median voter theorem pretty much dominates the demographics of those types of seats.
The problem with the hard conservatives taking over the party and losing an election as a result of their hard conservative views (such as climate change denialism) is that the members left after a defeat are themselves most likely to be hard conservative – making it difficult for a Party to escape from their ideological rut and to bridge the gap between the views of their base and the views of the wider electorate.
It’s the political equivalent of disappearing up ones own fundament.
We’ve seen this in action over the last week. The “flood” of correspondence flowing in to the offices of Coalition Senators and Reps members demanding that they not pass the ETS didn’t come from normal people. It came from their ideological base – a euphemism for folks whose views on any given issue are usually two standard deviations removed from the national mean.
Labor experienced a similar thing over the Tampa legislation in 2001 – being inundated with correspondence from true believers that simply wasn’t shared by a majority of the electorate.
Anyway – the whole thing is just getting bizarre and we won’t really know how it’s playing out in the public until early next week when the polling rolls in.
UPDATE: Here they are – Newspoll and the cracker of a Nielsen with questions up the wazoo.
In the meantime, since rationality seems to have completely flown the coop in the Liberal Party – what is the most bizarre possible outcome you can imagine occurring next week?
Considering what’s already happened, it’s probably a fair bet.
Elsewhere (deep breath): The Stump, Pollbludger (comments), Larvatus Prodeo, Christopher Joye, Piping Shrike, Andrew Elder, John Quiggin, Jack the Insider, Political Sword, The Tally Room, Grog’s Gamut
60 Comments
Pages: [1] 2 » Show All
Most bizarre outcome?
The Libs split into two parties. One made up of the moderates/wets/small ‘l’ Libs and the other made up of the conservatives.
Most Bizzare?
Bronwyn Bishop emerges as compromise opposition leader so she can campaign to be, our first female (allegedly) PM.
Well, you asked for bizzare?
Hockey gets the leadership, with Abbott as deputy. Hockey then declares the ETS bill must be passed ASAP, another spill is called, Abbott wins this time with Kevin Andrews as deputy. The sane senators cross the floor to vote FOR The ETS, which is duly passed. Minchin chucks a tanty and calls for the expulsion of all CC believers. The Sane Libs then form a new centrist party.
Q: What’s the difference between the Australian cricket team and the Liberal party?
A: after the next election the Australian cricket team will have more members
Imacca – I see your Bronny and raise you Wilson Tuckey, who simultaneously declares his love for and marriage to a goat.
yahoo politics board is full of the same crap that was posted before 2007 election – that the Libs are going to win etc… claiming that the last polls are out of date because they are 10 days old
What will they say Monday/Tuesday?
Any pollster not in the field this weekend is asleep at the wheel.
What makes this whole episode so strange, is that the denialists are fundamentally not acheiving anything. If they get their wish, Abbott becomes leader and the CPRS legislation is sent to committee, they’ll get obliterated at the next election, when a more drastic CPRS could potentially be introduced as they no longer exist as a political force.
There is going to be an ETS in some form or another within the next five years. From their point of view, this is their best chance for an ultra benign scheme and they’re doing their level best to implode over it. They’ve delayed a scheme that won’t start straight away anyway, by say two years but probably will end up with a stronger scheme as a result.
Madness.
Most bizarre? Exiled moderate Liberal party members resigning before the next election and recontesting their seats as Democrats.
Don’t say it’s impossible. That’s essentially how the Democrats got started in the first place!
The circle completes!
A Death Spiral if ever I’ve seen one!
Scenario 1: Rudd, in convinces the Queen (at the Commonwealth Conference) to force Quentin Bryce to sign the CPRS into law next week.
Scenario 2: Turnbull, Hockey & McFarlane resign & Rudd not only appoints them to the boards of Austrade (Turnbull, he wants to serve the country), Infrastructure Australia (Hockey, he knows about infrastructure), & National Water Commission (Mcfarlane, good for environment) respectively, but awards each an OA on Australia Day.
Scenario 3: Minchin, Abbot, Bernardi, et al resign from Liberal Party and join One Nation
Scenario 4: Kelly O’Dwyer replaces Julie as deputy
Scenario 5: Leadership spill is defeated 68 to 10 (the 10 spillists)
Scenario 6: Oz Editorial, Bolt, et al backs Turnbull & CPRS completely
Minchin finds God and walks away.
God finds Minchin and walks away
Pictures of Bonny and the Bull cavorting in a kerosene bath are found to be fake.
Re: David Richards – 6
“…the last polls are out of date because they are 10 days old.”
They do have a twisted logic. Any pollster that cannot register an ALP 2PP starting with a 6 or higher will be worried about their practices.
What about the Preferred PM question? Will it include 4 candidates this time?
I have to say I am disappointed by Kevin Andrews’ sudden disappearance after his rabble-rousing performance on Wednesday. I was genuinely excited when I heard he was canvassing for the leadership. I hope he re-emerges from the shadows to “lead” the Tories.
I was hoping for the apocalyptic scenario.. 48C over Canberra.. dust storm.. lightning hitting the PH flagpole several times.. power failure.. hmm.. tornado anyone?
Nothing like the fear of God
ok – how about a tipping comp on the ALP 2PP from the next polls covering this period of Lib implosion?
I think PASOK has it right as far as it starting with a 6… so I’ll go for 61
All of them up 1%, possibly 2%, relative to their previous, and all within MoE.
During what is a little bit of a distressing time for a democrat (small d!!!) – BK’s comment 14 really made me laugh.
A bizarre, but possible, scenario – Turnbull wins and many opponents walk out and join the Nats to form the “Conservative Party”
Less possible – Turnbull loses and takes a rump of colleagues to the cross-benches to pass the ETS and fly the flag for “liberalism”
and 19 year old Barath’s hundred on debut is a nice distraction today!
The interesting bit of the polls will be ETS questions (would ETS make you more or less likely to vote Coalition etc) because Turnbull’s opponents will say that any bad result, say 61-39, is all due to support of the ETS.
Rocket
Nice to be appreciated
That’s statistically far too generous, Possum.
I don’t think I’ve ever appreciated Schadenfreude before!
With regards to the “death spiral” I would say that is pretty much what happened to Labor Federally and in Victoria after the DLP split. It is very hard to get back on an even keel – it literally takes “generational change” after years in the wilderness.
To me this is the true legacy of Howard and the NSW right branch organisers. Since the defeat of Peacock they got lots of far right conservatives into parliament, later many into cabinet. Of course, many were given the safest seats, ensuring that the Liberal Party would stay very conservative for another ten years. But the joke is that with the electorate and the key issues moving back to centre now, this will keep the Liberals too far to the right of the Australian electorate to win for a decade.
People need only think back to Fraser’s day and what Howard was like then to realise that Howard was always well to the right of his own generation, even within his own party. He has remade the party in his own image.
Most bizarre is that no matter what happens there will still be devoted Liberal voters who believe in what the party stands for with all their heart and soul, even though it’s clear that nobody knows what that is.
“People need only think back to Fraser’s day and what Howard was like then to realise that Howard was always well to the right of his own generation, even within his own party. He has remade the party in his own image”
It always amazed me that he ever got elected ONCE. Anyone who paid the slightest attention to him since he got into Parliament should have known he’d be exactly the monster he became.
The sad thing is he dragged the ALP over to the right with him.
Turnbull wins (by one vote), and Abbott et al go off to join the Minchivik Party with Andrew Bolt as their mascot.
Poss
Love the graph but Xanthippe wants to know – how did you decide whether a Liberal was “Conservative” or “Moderate”? Are there any databases of people’s voting records on which to base these things?
God that’s a relief. I actually believed there was a huge mass of denialists out there – now I know that are are a significant but fringoid lunatic fringe.
OK most bizarre:
First Dog on the Moon contracts cat flu from Jasper and suffers massive frontal lobe damage and becomes a denialist
FDOTM publishes savage denialist cartoon that persuades 49% of the population including parliamentarians, but not MT.
Turnbull joins the ALP and gets a newly vacant seat.
The new ALP with MT just manage to vote a CPRS in.
Immediately after, Kevin gets the cat flu and joins the Fred Nile party
New Labor lead by Julia and Malcolm, goes on to a fifty year 51% reign.
The most bizarre photo of a politician this week was to be found in The Age. There was this dried-up wizened old man with died black hair, who looked as if he should be wearing a soutane with giant crucifix attached. It was of the man who declared himself to have the numbers for the leadership. Little Kevin Andrews!
Rocket Rocket: They’ve got their generational change, right here, right now. But, how to get rid of the old men that John Howard kept afloat during his tenure as the second worst Prime Minister in Oz history is the hard part. Don’t forget old men want to be remembered as having done something, even if they have to destroy their own party to do it. Also, Malcolm Turnbull is using the shield of CC as a life-raft. It’s hard to think of one Liberal party member who isn’t using CC for their ends. Yet it doesn’t exist, they say.
Speaking of generational change…guess who has been conspicuous by his absence? The original frozen icicle, Phillip Ruddock. Perhaps he thinks he get the job after everyone else has disembowelled themselves.
Anyway, thanks to my broken thumb I can only use one hand to type and it’s very tiring.
‘Night!
Mark Newton and Possum: Nah, it’s worse than that. They’re on the second time around the circle.
Most bizarre outcome? (on Possums theory that it’s the moderates who will swing and the hard-line denialists who will be safe) Nick Minchin as leader, Kevin Andrews as treasurer.
With Tony Abbott leaving to form a Democratic Liberal Party (Catholic).
Which would see me hiking off to Argentina.
Bizzare? How about Bolt for PM?
Time to leave the planet!
Sportingbet has pulled the Oppo Leader at next election market!
My reading of this is that Hockey is a non-starter in the current shenanigans and about to declare as much.
Could be wrong, but if the $1.50 fav had a hernia (or a change of mind!), and I was a bookie, I wouldn’t be letting the punters get on any of the others.
Possum Pollytics said:
Broadly speaking thats right. But I would quibble with your estimate of the delusionists/delayists as occupying positions two standard deviations from the national mean. The d/d sentiment is now crossed the border into the fringe of one standard deviation from the mean. Much of the revolt did come from “normal people”.
According to your own report ~ 20% of the voting population have d/d views. This represents about half of the L/NP primary vote, pretty much all of its rusted on base.
Thus the d/d L/NP base occupies around 30% of the RHS of the climate change anxiety curve. Assuming a Bell Curve distribution, with normal views encompassing around 35% each side of the mean, that means that around half of the d/d are, statistically speaking, “normal” people.
Unfortunately Bolt et al have done their work very well.
Regardless of one’s own personal belief in Global Warming it does seem an extremely strange strategy to have a big public fight over your denialism when we’ve just had and are continuing to have a November of record high temperatures and bushfire risk.
The average punter is sitting at home this weekend in Sydney and Brisbane sweating their ass off thinking you know what, there may actually be something to this whole Global Warming thing.
As the great Karl M said:” The Liberal Party: first as tragedy, then as farce”.
don’t forget the unseasonal november heatwave in SA and Vic a week ago
Possum Pollytics said:
Excellent analogy. Beazley neutralised the issue for the ALP by gritting his teeth and signing onto Howard’s more stringent Border Protection policy. This stopped the ALP haemmoraghing votes to the Right.
Rudd has wavered slightly on this before finally deciding to stick with the Beazley approach. It has done him no harm. The evidence shows that public hostility to people smuggling on boats is still hovering around 65% of the voting population.
Turnbull is attempting to do the same thing from the opposite direction – stop a haemmoragh of votes to the Left – on the far more important and potentially divisive climate change issue.
More generally, the two-party median voter convergent model of democracy that has evolved in the post WWII era has served citizens and parties very well. The LP have had a brain snap and are preparing to jump ship. That just does not make sense.
My prediction is that the Centre will hold, just.
Most bizarre outcome? Opinion polls show that Turnbull’s approval rating soars to the same level as Rudd’s. Liberals then decide to dump him anyway…
Not very bizarre: the spill motion is successful; Turnbull wins by default as Abbott and Hockey fall over themselves to not nominate, Chip and Dale style: “After you!” “Oh, no. You first, I insist.” “I couldn’t. Please, you go first.”
“Give me the Liberal leadership – but not yet!”
Gutless aren’t they?
To use a cricket analogy, Howard fed the hookshot to Beazley and he (eventually) shouldered arms. Similarly Howard did it to Rudd on Haneef, and Rudd just went along for the ride, knowing that there was nothing to gain by protesting Haneef’s treatment – either the govt. was right (unlikely) and you would look foolish, or the govt was wrong in which case they look foolish whether you backed them or not (as turned out to be the case, and in opposition you can always say that you weren’t given enough information)
“Similarly Howard did it to Rudd on Haneef, and Rudd just went along for the ride, knowing that there was nothing to gain by protesting Haneef’s treatment – either the govt. was right (unlikely) and you would look foolish, or the govt was wrong in which case they look foolish whether you backed them or not”
One of the most interesting revelations from the Haneef case was that the people interviewing him on one occasion had no idea what Urdu is. So much for intelligence services.
Not surprising calyptorhynchus at #47:
I was at a meeting at Sydney Uni when a geek asked what URDU stood for.
Isn’t URDU text for “you are DUmb”?
the lack of general knowledge among the general populace is bad enough, but among professionals such as spooks or journos – it is simply horrendous.
Pages: [1] 2 » Show All