The long, painful recovery from bad election defeats

The 2007 federal election wasn’t the rout I feared , and so we are (probably…) not in the situation in which an unelectable opposition rather than good performance keeps the government in power. But a poll in today’s Sydney Sun-Herald shows the unfortunate long-term consequences of such defeats, in this case the 1999 NSW state election.

According to the story accompanying the poll:

Three-quarters of voters think the health system is poor or just fair, and almost two-thirds have no confidence that the Iemma Government can make improvements….

Only one-in-five gave the Government a tick, with 18 per cent saying its performance over the last year had been good, and 2 per cent saying it had been excellent. In contrast, 39 per cent said the Government’s performance was just fair and 38 per cent declared it poor.

But how will they vote?:

Labor has lost ground since its stunning win last March, but it would still have scraped in with a two-point margin – compared with four points a year ago – if an election were held yesterday.

The problem is that the Opposition has not succeeded in establishing itself as a credible alternative. It seems that only a quarter even know who the Opposition Leader (Barry O’Farrell) is. He’s certainly not invisible – I have seen him on TV many times despite being in Sydney only seven or eight times a year. But clearly he isn’t making a big impact. And apart from Shadow Health Minister Jillian Skinner (who used to be my local member when I lived in Sydney) I could not off the top of my head have named any Shadow Minister (here is the list).

Surely next election they will either win or do well enough to be a real danger to Labor. But the best case scenario is a more than ten year recovery period from a bad election loss, trapping NSW with a government that deserves to lose.

53 thoughts on “The long, painful recovery from bad election defeats

  1. As usual you’ve read the wrong book, homer. Last time we had a discussion you were telling me how great Nazi economics was seeing you had read it in a book. You really do have a poroble with never question authority, don’t you?

    No, I’m not walking away from anything as I said to the other apologist amigo of yours. And what makes you think I walked away from for it anyway? Do I need to mention the accusation in every comment now or otherwise you think I have disavowed it?. LOL. Here’s the scoop, I’ll let you know the minute I do, ok, so stop asking.

    >Make up your mind and produce some evidence.

    Produce some evidence he ONLY supported the Viet Cong? Go!

    You have mixed up Fonda with Jim Cairns. Nor surprising as they did look alike.

    I’m sure in your mind’s eye they do.

    >Only a complete imbecile would agree the Vietcong and the North Vietnamese were the same.

    I didn’t. But only a complete imbecile would think the south would have remained separate and that the Viet Cong were not allied with uncle ho.

    for heaven’s sake please do some reading before you display even more ignorance.

    Homer stop ruining a thread and insulting everyone’s intelligence.

    Learn to read as well.

    In Eastwoodlish?


  2. JC, either he gave secrets to the Soviets or he didn’t. produce the evidence.

    The only wellknown Australian ever photographed in Hanoi or anywhere else was Wilfred Burchett. your memory again is deserting you.

    If the Vietcong and the North Vietnameses were such bosom buddies name the vietcong on the politburo before and after the fall of Saigon.

    Why were vietcong put into re-education camps because they disagreed with who were in leadership positions in the south.

    Yep you guessed it they objected to their comrades in arms being there.

    JC you and mark were embarassing in your complete ignorance of german economic history
    you apparently have the same level of understanding of South east asian politics. Why am I not surprised!

    As for Jim Cairns views I heard him once and was told his speeches were essentially the same anywhere he went. They were precisely what DD said.
    He wasn’t impressive but then again I didn’t think much of him.

    He was never a stalinist nor supporter of Stalin. ( look up when he died.)


Comments are closed.