I think ScoMo lost because the population want to move on psychologically from Corona- ScoMo is one of the symbols of this point in their lives. Sad that people are so emotional rather than logical- but that's democracy- all I can do is tell the electorate to try and understand issues from both perspectives- for their own benefit.

It's a common fault to try and solve a problem before understanding it.

Hebrew psychologist Edward Bernay's wanted to use mass emotion to control cultures- he wrote the book on Propaganda.

I mostly agree with the writer. I never thought I would be saying this; the Nationals have a more "progressive" leadership than the Liberals. Littleproud is in my opinion more progressive than Dutton, but I also believe Hermann Goering was more liberal than Heinrich Himmler, but they were both starting from a very low base.

I do believe at the next Liberal Party meeting the new warm and fuzzy Pete will be handing out flowered shirts and sandals to all and sundry, extolling all of the (new party) faithful to join him in a blast of the Bob Dylan classic; "Blowin' In The Wind". Its all part of the new Pete's sharing and caring image. Me thinks if Pete wants to change his image, a long haired wig, a headband, beads and a pair of dark sunny's would go well with the flowered shirt and sandals.

Oh Peter B.

Ye should steer clear of predictions.

In "First of all, Peter Dutton is unlikely to become leader of the Liberal Party."

Ye came unstuck.

Mienself, I'm a Burkeian Conservative http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke who will accept change once the proponent acknowledges the Wisdom of the Past, in detail.

I'll have you know Dutton ("Dutz" to his henchmen) is flamboyant, flashy and flirtacious. Not the RAN's sans hair anti-refugee boat missile at all.

Every man has his, umm, "leanings" and we should accept reformed warm and softy Dutzo's with tolerance.

That Dutz is another Manchurian Candidate heaven sent to keep the Coalition out of office for 6 years, or 10, is Operation Successful...

It's all part of a larger plan.

Governments are a product of society.
People often say "Every nation gets the government they deserve"
What if that idea was weaponised?
What is there was a plan to deliberately change the government of our nations?
How would they do that?
- They do it by changing the people, and that's what the United Nations immigrant quotas are for.

Change the People = Change the Government

Cause and effect.

Its one thing to talk about being the good Samaritan and caring about others, but what if it's a trap by design, one that seeks to ultimately change our governments and push us towards a one world government ruled by bankers, elites, big business and foreign beaurecrats?

The question I ask everyone here?
Do you want to be ruled by foreigners?
Because we will be (and virtually are already) if we don't figure out better policies for ourselves.
I've come up with some good ideas.
And everyday that passes, is another nail in the coffin for our nations sovereignty.

I'll say it again 'Change the People = Change the Government.'

Democracy is a 2 horse race designed precisely for the reason to unknowingly push us towards constant change, constant shifting of the goal posts.

Many of these changes we unwittingly buy into because they are based on change for the better.
But what if you stepped back and saw that the whole thing was actually nefarious by design?

Watch this video and you might learn that what's happening is by design, and a concerted effort to push us towards a future ruled entirely by the state, but not our state, an unelected state:
In Geneva (WEF and WHO)
In Germany (UNFCCC)
In Washington (IMF and World Bank)
In NYC (UN)

It's all by design, watch this for 15mins
Change the People, Change the Government.
http://youtu.be/364cxeR5EAg

Right-leaning parties garnered nearly 50 percent of the first preference vote at the election. So clearly there is a constituency for a centre-right party. Moving further to the left would simply consign the Liberals to electoral irrelevancy and oblivion. Why vote for a left Liberal Party when you can vote for the 'Real McCoy' i.e. the harder-left Labor and the Greens?

The problem was that the Liberal Party stood for nothing at the 2022 election. It didn't fail in the contest of ideas - it failed to even turn up to the contest of ideas. Moreover, it was led by a deeply unpopular leader. Nobody liked Scott Morrison, not even rusted-on Liberals. The party had been in power for a decade and was stale. It also ran a terrible, ineffective, lifeless campaign.

The Liberal Party needs to design policies that appeal to the battlers in the outer suburbs and the regions. The wealthy inner-city has gone woke and green-left. It isn't coming back to the Liberal Party.

Winning back some of the swinging battler vote from Labor, and reclaiming some of the One Nation and Palmer vote, could put the Liberal Party back in power at the next election. I suspect Australia is in a rough and wild ride over the next 3 years and there will be plenty of material for an effective opposition.