First up one of the most sensible things you’ll read about the 2019 election from Waleed Aly.
The coalition contrived to run without a significant policy agenda beyond offering tax cuts. Overwhelmingly, its campaign was a negative one, attacking Labor’s platform as reckless and anti-aspirational. But this wasn’t a populist message, either. In fact it’s a message of contentedness and caution. Its fundamental assumption is that broadly speaking, the system works fine: Trickle-down economics brings prosperity, and to the extent things could be better, such as wages, the answer is patience and more of the same. Labor couldn’t be trusted precisely because it wanted to shake things up.
That this argument delivered the coalition a stunning victory in what appeared to be an unwinnable election does not represent some new Australian political logic. Rather, it follows a well-established tradition and conventional wisdom: The Australian electorate is averse to big change.
Even so, the fact that Labor’s narrative of “fairness” failed before the coalition’s story of “aspiration” suggests Australia has not called time on neoliberalism in the way that voters elsewhere seem ready to. Certainly there is disillusionment, evidenced by a record vote for minor parties and independents. But ultimately, 27 years of economic growth and only six years of wage stagnation (rather than the decades of it in the United States) mean that while skepticism of the corporate world and trepidation about the economy exists, Australia isn’t prepared to experiment with its economic formula just yet. Australians may not be entirely happy with the status quo, but they are clearly still prepared to vote for it.
Read the whole thing – it is very good.
Then Sam Dastyari:
The Labor Party lost the election because the Australian public didn’t like our policies and we ran a poor campaign.
It’s that simple.
But the fundamental reality Labor needs to face is this: the Australian public had a good look at what we put forward and said they didn’t want it.
That’s a brutal lesson.
Some serious plain talking there.
I did particularly enjoy this line:
I supported that agenda. I agreed with it wholeheartedly. I also — it now turns out — am in the minority. I’m a teetotaling (but boy was that tested this weekend), inner-city, non-practicing Muslim vegan. Hard to believe that I might be out of touch.
I, too, am non-practising vegan.
Morrison campaigned hard and against the odds to win an unlikely victory – not unlike Trump’s path to the White House through once impenetrable Democrat rust-belt strongholds. Or Brexit.
But it’s a lazy comparison that quickly runs out of steam.
Morrison is no Trump. He’s not a disrupter; he isn’t seeking to tear down institutions like the Reserve Bank of Australia; he’s no fan of the patently false idea that “tariff wars are easy to win”; he’s avoided blowing up the budget to deliver outrageous unfunded promises to a credulous public.
Australians voted for Morrison because they feared change. Americans voted for Trump because they were sick of the status quo.
Adam Creighton in the Australian:
In February I bet on the Coalition winning the election (four figures, since you ask).
Colleagues laughed, but Labor’s sudden assault on the government’s biggest success — deterring boat arrivals — seemed political madness. Describing the defeat over the so-called medevac bill as a historic loss was laughable. It was the beginning of the end for Labor.
Not one of Labor’s policies would have helped lift sagging productivity growth, which is what underpins living standards. A slew of income tax increases (in an already heavily taxed economy) and wasteful spending would have been a double whammy, deterring economic activity on the revenue side while wasting the additional revenue on the expenditure side.
Labor should dump these policies, alongside its tiresome lie that the government has been cutting funding to health and education.
This is an insult to people who believe words have meaning. Expenditures on health and education are growing faster than inflation, faster than the population, without clear improvements in quality.
“Tiresome lie” – that is a strong condemnation of the ALP.
Miranda Devine at the Daily Tele:
Warringah was lost because Liberal voters executed a one-time only surgical strike against an MP they perceived to be a danger to the Liberal Party. “Quiet Australians”, as Scott Morrison referred to them on election night, opted for a mercy killing. No malice involved.
The most conservative Liberal booths swung hard against Abbott. Mosman booths which had voted as much as 65 per cent for him in 2016, delivered a primary vote less than 40 per cent on Saturday. These are people who have voted for Abbott time and again, but they felt he had gone rogue. They hadn’t given him a mandate to destroy the party, bring down a Liberal government and deliver Australia to Bill Shorten.
That’s exactly correct. Abbott should have retired from politics. It isn’t a case of being a quitter – it’s a case of what more did he have to offer as an MP. Short answer – nothing. He can still do all the community and volunteering work that he does. None of that is reliant upon him being in the Parliament.