Why Labor Lost and Lost Touch

The values I refer to is that anyone can make something of themselves if they are willing to put in hard work and effort.

Sure. Not everybody shares those values. But a great section of the population does.

 

On Sunday one political analyst who has studied such things opined that the four most effective leaders from the left in the last 30-odd years were Bob Hawke (AUS), David Lange (NZ), Tony Blair (UK) and Bill Clinton (USA). He though the reason they all achieved success boiled down to one basic fact - they all understood you can only achieve good outcomes for people by first achieving/maintaining a strong economy. Without that you have nothing.
Words to live by.

 

Or more simply they took bad policy to the election and it got rejected. Bowan wants to run for leader and run the same policies at the next election. Fantastic idea.

 

I really dig into labors policies and understand the implications of them. They are progressive on the face of them but dig deep and understand them properly and they actually pretty nasty. I took the time to readvthe Grattan Report on negative gearing and CGT changes and it admits the policies are regressive. So you and tsk can dismiss me as child like or following memes but actually I'm masters educated. It's easy to insult people who don't agree with you. Read the posts from the losing side. We are greedy, stupid, uneducated, child like.. blah blah. Those posters can't accept that actually the polices just weren't that good. And just to be clear I am not saying that you personally posted those things. Just that if you read the posts those things are all there. It's ungracious to attack the people who don't agree with you when you lose. Maybe we are not as stupid and uneducated as those posts make out. Just sayin'

 

Unless you and I are somehow friends on Facebook, what i said wasn't directed at you .... and neither of us have said anything like what you claim. Tsk and I don't stoop to name calling, on most occasions

 

Labor lost because they wanted to turn Australia into a regressive socialist state. They were ignorant of the importance of the reforms Hawke and Keating introduced and had (have) a warped view of what is fair.

 

Labor should have won, it was called the “unloseable” election for a reason.

Unless they take a long, hard, honest look at why they failed to attract voters, they risk making the same mistakes again.

Maybe actually getting out of Canberra, Sydney and Melbourne where their supporters (and jobs) are concentrated and visiting regional areas doing it really tough may be a good start. And really listening.
Marg

 

It was …. lets conquer and divide the country, they seemed to do a good job of this.

No clue whatsoever, continually referring to average people who worked hard and pay their taxes to perhaps provide a better lifestyle in retirement as high end was nuts... As I said before they deserved to lose.

 

Why is everyone focusing on Clive?

How about the millions of spending and free manpower used by the Unions and GetUp? (Or are they just ineffective that's why no one is commenting??

 

Labor did not need Clive, Labor did a good job of this, their message did not go down too well with voters.
Dont touch our SMSF, taxes, negative gearing, cgt and economy first

 

Got a link to that grattan report. Reports that I've read from them indicate ALP policies were reasonably.

 

Message went well with about 50% of the population. A large percentage of the other 50% Would never vote for a centre/centre left party...some just get spooked and believe that Coalition are better economic managers because they compare government finances to household finances - it's all they know.

For me, I'll just continue to call people out on dodgy policy both in this forum and in person.

 

And some of us realise Govt finances are the only finances Govt should ever control.
I always find it amusing that someone expecting Govt's to take care of their adult responsbilities, believes this makes them intellectually superior to someone who is able to take care of their own.

 

Some sound analysis here: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-22/quexit-is-not-the-answer-to-labors-loss-in-queensland
It's only going to get worse for them imo:

• thermal coal is a dead end - death spiral with solar
• Meat consumption (beef and lamb) declining and exports livestock management failures make exports more difficult
• Mining will become more automated thus reducing need outside of construction and maintenance...even these will be limited due to prefab off site and shipped in (both initial construction and maintenance)

Agriculture targetting high value crops may do well but increased weather volatility due to climate change may dramatically impact this. Tourism will probably decline as attractions like the reef and rain forest decline.

 

What are you even talking about?

 

"Would never vote for a centre/centre left party...some just get spooked and believe that Coalition are better economic managers because they compare government finances to household finances - it's all they know"

 

I tried to really dig into the Liberal's policies, but unfortunately they didn't seem to have any ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In relation to the rest of your post, keep in mind that there's just as much childish mudslinging from people with a similar opinion to yours on these forums.

The number of posts through the election campaign on here:

• implying everyone who votes for Labor is a socialist who wants hand outs for everyone;
• posts 'hilariously' referring to Shorten as 'BS' (haha get it? it stands for bull ****! So funny and witty! probably the same people who thought 'Juliar' Gillard was the pinnacle of wit);
• provide zero input to discussion on policy, instead attacking individual posters and/or politicians (specifically those from Labor).

was truly incredible.

But in saying that, your posts are generally not of this nature, and I appreciate your ability to discuss policy rather than making it personal. Yours is one of the few opinions I respect on here because of this - regardless of agreeing or not.

Kudos to you @Perthguy.

 

Yes we are above average now in terms of income or assets, for me it took good 40 years living here, and what is wrong with being above average, for aspiration, for striving for more, for doing more, shouldn't we be rewarded accordingly?
For me being wealthy is not just a monetary definition, it encompasses those close to me whether family or friends or organisations I wish to support, for having the freedom to speak, having good health, enabling me to practice my spiritual beliefs, having the choice to aspire or succeed or to risk or to try to have more.... Basically all aspects that constitute living a good life.
It just seems at this point in time, the party that lost went against most people's values or their beliefs.
No point though to worry too much, no one party can rule forever....such is a folly of life!

 

I never implied , nor did say, there is anything wrong with being above average. You're answering a question that was never asked. I'm glad you have broad view on what wealthy means - although the sentence "aspire or succeed or to risk or to try to have more" suggests it may not as broad as you make it out to be.