For all his faux blokeishness and Western Sydney credentials, Latham had no more ability to relate to the electorate than any insider Labor hack.
The over-turning of the orthodoxies of the Howard period during 2008-2009 has been forgotten as much as the reason for the popularity for the man who brought them about.
If Rudd was so powerful, how could he have been summarily dismissed within barely a blink of an eye?
Karl Bitar says that Howard’s agenda has little relevance to the electorate today. He should know.
Gillard claims to want to move away from political correctness on asylum seekers, but in fact her entire approach to the issue shares the assumption of the politically correct left; namely that concerns about it are such a powerful inflammatory force in the electorate that it must be indulged and made a big deal of.
Like One Nation, Abbott’s accession to the leadership is being confused with another phenomenon – the revival of the right.
If Howard couldn’t sustain a distinctive agenda in the run up to the 2007 election, why should Abbott after 2010?
What we are seeing here is the second stage of the problem of undermining of the Australian political class, that began with the exhaustion of the domestic program twenty years ago, and has now extended to the international sphere.
Hartcher is doing the same thing that Antony Green did in his piece in The Drum undermining current polling – belittling the significance of the 2007 election
There is some sign that in responding to Abbott’s threat to turn the clock back and resume the old left-right ding-dong, there is part of the government’s strategy that is conceding to it much as Labor did in the last election.