Textor? I believe he was essentially right and depending on where you stand?

Just as a frog can be slowly boiled to a warm and comfortable death, a very slow and gradual shift further to the right can also go unnoticed? With the moderate middle now described as the centre left?

Whereas the centre right of today, would not look entirely out of place in a national socialist party of yesteryear?

The "real liberal party" of Mr Menzies tolerated public ownership, always providing it had private enterprise competition, and was a very different animal from the liberal party of today, with a hitherto unknown loading of hard dry conservatives?

Mr Menzies wet Liberals completed the snowy Mountains project! As someone like a moderate Small L liberal like Nick Xenophon would? And I bet his "immigration minister" simply would not have kept a young lady incarcerated for refusing to return to Iran, where a family member would be free to again, repeatedly rape her at will, with complete impunity!?

But instead would release her into the community and the waiting arms of her Iranian born husband. Even Malcolm Fraser found a more humane way, which included a regional solution and essential cooperation, to resettle genuine asylum seekers with genuine fear of persecution?

The shining example of hard right conservatives given their head has to be represented in the northern territory and some very different examples of "appropriate" law and order issues?

When decent law abiding Germans were forced to look at the death camps of WW11 Germany, they almost, to a generic man, couldn't believe what they'd allowed to be done in their name?

Today's coalition would have simply rejected Snowy's nation building vision as too expensive and undoable or alternatively, only possible if outsourced or privatised?

And seem to fear public ownership as some sort of poison? A consequence of being brainwashed by your own mindless mantras?

And consequently are now too far to the right of the election winning moderate middle to understand the real problem!?
Alan B.

"By the time of the election the only thing that remained was the likability factor giving him a slight edge over Shorten, but with him and Shorten each having a net negative personal approval rating."

Precisely...

Many voters had worked out by the time of the election that Turnbull's policies were pretty much the same as Abbott's policies (save for the superannuation changes).

Those policies bore no relation to Turnbull's former stances on most issues...he got the job because he agreed to pursue a hard-right agenda.

The fact that he just scraped in is more down to his former reputation and the fact that he didn't really have an election agenda. He waffled and digressed and skipped hither and thither. Words like "innovation, exciting, agile" and "a plan" (which he never revealed) happy merely to repeat ad nauseam that he had one.

Alan B. - good post.

"Hard right"? You really should update your slogans, Poirot.

Alan B. - Usual waffle.

I found Poll Bludger very accurate in predicting how close the Election would be. Poll Bludger amounts to the largest Poll. It combines the main national opinion polls and so is the Elephant in the Room.
- see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_opinion_polling_for_the_Australian_federal_election,_2016#Federal_two-party-preferred_polling_aggregates_by_state

In the week before the Election Poll Bludger predicted TPP of 50.5% for LNP and 49.5% for ALP. In so doing predicted a 2.6% swing against LNP . 2.6% is very close to Graham's after election figures.

But lets keep on studiously ignoring Poll Bludger...

Correction Poll Bludger predicted TPP for LNP 50.9% and ALP 49.1% - with 2.6% swing against LNP.

Not bad when Margin of Errors are counted.

see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_opinion_polling_for_the_Australian_federal_election,_2016#Federal_two-party-preferred_polling_aggregates_by_state

The Australian people must be pretty gullible, to the point of stupidity, if they find Turnbull likable. Of course they also fell for his clone, the also saccharin falsely sweet Rudd.

To me they both came out of the same mould, & I would trust neither of them further than I could kick them. If his condescending false friendliness is what passes for likability in Oz today, god help us.

I think it was that so many conservatives saw through this falseness that cost him, & the party so many votes.

All that saved them is that so many could not put Labor or the greens above the LNP when the crunch came. If there is a next time with Turnbull as leader, after his speech election night, the boot will really go in, & the LNP could end up less than a cricket team.

Five friends have said they are sorry now that they just couldn't vote against the LNP member when the time came, although they had intended to, & wish they had done so now. If there is a next time they will be much stronger they reckon.

Usual waffle ttbn? What?

Like with fingers in both ears, endlesslyrepeating, la, la, la, la, la, la abuse and scorn waffle? Whenever the shortcomings of the tea-party or the equally moribund religious right are illuminated??

I rest my case!
Alan B.

Hi Hasbeen

Yes, in the worst of worlds:

- Rudd becomes gets the job he covets, Secretary General of the UN, and, even worse,

- Pell Pope

Textor does not have proper grasp of centrism. If Malcolm Turnbull was true centrist, he would run as an independent. How can one be a centrist if they are member of either of the 2 major parties?? Being certre right is just that, a little too the right, not centrist in the true meaning of the word > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centrism

I know this is semantics, but I have to call it for what it is because I can't read that Australian article without being a paying subscriber!

In
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=18397&page=0

Graham read voters accurately:

" As voters are apparently determined to take out insurance in the senate by spreading their vote around, a perception that it has been made more difficult for them to do this might result in them trying even harder to ensure their vote doesn’t flow to a major. So we may end up with a situation where a significant number of voters preference amongst minor parties and exhaust without getting to any of the majors. "

Senate shows public interests better than HoR.

Government needs move to center for legislation.

Legislation, less is better this Parliament.

More time publicly negotiating, obtain wider public agreement before push legislation requiring agreement from both Houses.

Alan B. writes here
" When decent law abiding Germans were forced to look at the death camps of WW11 Germany, they almost, to a generic man, couldn't believe what they'd allowed to be done in their name? "

Lest We Forget, each time Australians asked to identify their racial identification, be horrified.

Before 1967 Referendum Commonwealth was intrusive, offensive, despite claims of NO legal authority denied Australians right to drink, to work, to attend school, to live in town, removed children from families, only reason racial identification.

1967 Referemdum ended long campaign to extinguish, to eliminate, to end, ALL racial discrimination through legislation and gazette.

Government, advisers, influence makers, those feeding from them, soon enough walking same racist pathways, dividing Australians by racial identification, once again.

Same excuses "to assist", Commonwealth racial prejudice, segregation, apartheid existed pre-1967 Referendum, still does today.

Legislation "to assist" based on racial division, leads to same conclusions, same consequences.

Commonwealth segregates Australian families using racial measures, measures Attorney-General told Parliament did not exist, yet claimed makes lawful such segregation.

Not need take racist pathway, simple needs assessments show assistance required for housing, health, education, and employment, without racial tags.

Wealthy corporate land-owners given Commonwealth funds for housing, while refuse issue tenancy leases, refuse maintain own houses, on own land.

Exists NO neutrality, are either supporters, or opponents to racism.

.