Why are there so many LNP supporters who cannot bring themselves to

[donnashuggy]

Admit that Tony Abbott is useless?

Disclaimer : I am not an adoring fan of the leader of the opposition.

[poddster]

Have you forgotten that under John Howard the country had no debt and in fact enjoyed a surplus?

When to Lefties took over they squandered it in double quick time and when they vacated they left a MASSIVE debt.

If they are let back in, in under a decade the debt will just keep on going up and up.

[icyfroth]

---

@iapetus_rocks wrote:

Mr Abbott is a veritable poster boy for what the LNP believe. He claims that the public opposition to his policies stems from a failure to market them and to explain them to the public.

He is useless at explaining his policies to the public because the public needs no explanation to see that LNP policies are aimed at making the average working Aussie and the average poor Aussie even worse off than they already are, and are aimed at making those who are already well off, even more so.

Cynical, greedy, mean and  tricky and out of touch with what Australians want and need.

He's not so different from John Howard in his philosophy, he's just not so good at "marketing" it to the voters.

---

So the  philosophy's ok, just not the marketing?

In other words: he has the right message. we just don't like his delivery, so we're opposing it. Because we don't  like his style.

sheesh.

[iapetus_rocks · Accepted solution]

I haven't forgotten that under John Howard the govt wanted to introduce a policy called "workchoices" which would have seen every working person take a significant cut in wages just to prevent their employer hiring someone who would agree to work for less.

This nasty, mean policy lost him the election.

The LNP have learned nothing.

[poddster]

Is that what workchoices was?

Most unthinking, gullible voters bought the story that the Lefties spent hundreds of millions  were selling.

THAT is what lost JH the election.

Workchoices was about negotiation with a prospective employer/employee a remuneration agreed upon by both parties, a win win situation. But that would have taken the power of stand over tactics from the unions and it would have meant that they would have to negotiate with a prospective employers instead of dictating terms to them

[iapetus_rocks · Accepted solution]

"So the  philosophy's ok, just not the marketing?

In other words: he has the right message. we just don't like his delivery, so we're opposing it. Because we don't  like his style."

No, how did you get that from my post? perhaps I'm not explaining or marketing it correctly. 😉

Surely you know what I'm saying.

Mr Abbott is truly representing what the LNP stand for and he's blaming the public opposition to his nasty, mean and tricky policies on a failure on his part to "explain" them properly.

We don't need no stinking explanations to see the LNP policies and philosophy as being anathema to those who are struggling on an average working person's wage or those who are really battling with poverty.

We don't need any explanations or smooth marketing ploys to see that the LNP policies are aimed at making those who are already wealthy, even more so and what is more . . at the expense of those who aren't.

[iapetus_rocks · Accepted solution]

Poddster, the discussion about workchoices has been done to death and everyone knows and understands it for what it was . . . an attempt to "auction" the right to work to the lowest bidder.

and yes, that policy lost John Howard his govt and even his own seat, the policy was that bad.

[poddster]

Everyone?

Huge assumption there.

I for one have always negotiated my remuneration and if an agreement could not be reached i went elsewhere.

That simple I chose where to work.

[myoclon1cjerk · Accepted solution]

Choosing where to work is not a luxury the low paid have.That luxury disappeared over 40 years ago,never to return.The object of Workchoices was to break down collective strength,though the funny thing is at the same time the LNP was telling us the union movement was irrelevant and toothless.How wrong PM Winston Weaselbrow was.

[poddster]

The unions are always screaming for higher and higher rates of pay for the less skilled instead of helping to get a higher level of skills.

They have driven employers offshore with those demands.

It is unfortunately in the interest of the unions to keep the workforce dumb, less skilled and dependent on them, that is how they exist.

It also drives the higher skilled people off shore, they follow the employers who have been driven of shore.

If there is no break in this cycle Australia will become a welfare country (heading that way very rapidly)

We have the resources to be a manufacturing country, that is being held back because of lack of a higher skilled workforce and the grip of the unions.

[poddster]

40 years ago?

Guess who spring readily to mind?

Whitlem, and it went downhill from there

Hawke and Keating did their bit to speed up the decline

.