CP will likely move back to UAP and carry on with that political project moving forward. TOP was a unique and term-limited opportunity that landed in his lap after losing his high court bid to run UAP, opening a door for him to still undertake a political project to make a difference in 2025.
Rather than splitting the vote, TOP polled more Lower House votes nationally that Libertarians, Australian Christians , People First and Family First combined which was an outstanding effort for a 10 week campaign.
More so coming from a point where no one had heard of TOP in mid February to one where nearly everyone knew of TOP in 10 weeks. That's a direct outcome of CP spending $60m of his personal funds to back a new political brand on marketing where he had full liberty to spend it on whatever marketing he decided was in the best interests of the success of the party. No knees were needed to be bent to accommodate this. It was a blessing to the TOP candidates to have their campaigns supported this way in such a short period of time.
If it had not been for cyclone Anthony (Albert) TOP would not have been capable of performing as well as the party did as the timing was far too close as it was, let alone Albanese calling it on his preferred date right in the middle of the cyclone. Which turned out to be a strong storm....
The preference deal of putting the Sitting Member last ages much better than One Nation who as a direct result of TOP, went straight to Liberals and got the backing that likely helped them in the Senate. This will not age well moving forward. But TOP has a clean sheet by comparison when it comes to bending the knee to the Majors. They all were put last!
Now the real efforts will see how willing the loudest parties of the election campaigns are when it comes to uniting together to work with TOP to fill the void of the self destructing Liberal party.
Hanson with 4 Senators wont be interested in uniting with anyone, she may even have her eye on Babet to achieve Senate Party status, but his contractual ties with CP will be very expensive to break.
So that leaves the rest of the conservative right leaning minors to get their heads together to bring about real change... or not... and instead rinse and repeat in 2028 for about the same outcome as 2025...
Lets hope common sense prevails and key decision makers get that electoral history has proven that voters do not vote for brands but instead are drawn to unifying values that extend across the political divide..
And Gerard Rennick needs to be taking a lead role in the new movement as well..
A pro-active article, Scott, amidst a flurry of pieces circulating right now that just point out the bleeding obvious of what our problems are. We all know what the problems are; we need a lot more solutions put up. As you say, point out the “how” with specific examples. We absolutely must shift that conversation and fast.
Great points and a thought-provoking question. It's a tough conversation to have when most of your conversation partners are receiving some form of "largesse" from the government and you're the odd one out.
"I just want to keep more of what I earn, so that I can help those around me" gets laughed at.
"But the government does that for you." and it goes from there (because telling them you don't trust the Government is always amusing).
I'm going to start thinking about phrasing things in terms of growth and not cuts - see how that goes.
It didn't do your brand any favors when your key candidates attacked Trumpet of Patriots relentlessly from the moment the party announced its launch in February. Consistent relentless slanderous attack. Maybe have a think about whether that sends a message of unity to the Australian people and you may end up doing better than your Australian and USA counterparts who have recently polled around the same 1 percent of the vote. Australia needs unity not point scoring egos who see any other movement as a threat that needs to be destroyed! Unsuccessfully, if I might add, given TOP polled second to one nation in a campaign that was less than 10 weeks from launch in February. Bottom line - be open to unity not division. it will serve the Australian people far greater than pot shots from glass houses.
Libertarians worked hard to bind the centre-right minor parties. Clive Palmer was uninterested. And at this last election, one could be forgiven for thinking TOP were supporting Labor.
Thanks for engaging! But bending the knee to Clerv/Suellen isn’t my idea of unity. You might be new here, but with a headline policy like capping interest rates at 3%, it’ll be tough to win over libertarians.
A woman at a networking evening said "I don't mind my taxes going towards [insert insipid government vote buying scheme here]" We were in polite company, and had to bite my tongue NOT to say "Well, would you put a gun to everyone's head who would mind that? Because that's what taxes are." I know I would've sounded like a lunatic, considering most people have zero conception of how a political economy works. How to get that across in the moment with empathy... it would come to me in a shower three weeks later.
My tongue knows your pain! How about this: "What if taxes were lower, and we could use that extra money to fund causes we care about? We’d better support what matters to us and let the government focus on more crucial issues."
CP will likely move back to UAP and carry on with that political project moving forward. TOP was a unique and term-limited opportunity that landed in his lap after losing his high court bid to run UAP, opening a door for him to still undertake a political project to make a difference in 2025.
Rather than splitting the vote, TOP polled more Lower House votes nationally that Libertarians, Australian Christians , People First and Family First combined which was an outstanding effort for a 10 week campaign.
More so coming from a point where no one had heard of TOP in mid February to one where nearly everyone knew of TOP in 10 weeks. That's a direct outcome of CP spending $60m of his personal funds to back a new political brand on marketing where he had full liberty to spend it on whatever marketing he decided was in the best interests of the success of the party. No knees were needed to be bent to accommodate this. It was a blessing to the TOP candidates to have their campaigns supported this way in such a short period of time.
If it had not been for cyclone Anthony (Albert) TOP would not have been capable of performing as well as the party did as the timing was far too close as it was, let alone Albanese calling it on his preferred date right in the middle of the cyclone. Which turned out to be a strong storm....
The preference deal of putting the Sitting Member last ages much better than One Nation who as a direct result of TOP, went straight to Liberals and got the backing that likely helped them in the Senate. This will not age well moving forward. But TOP has a clean sheet by comparison when it comes to bending the knee to the Majors. They all were put last!
Now the real efforts will see how willing the loudest parties of the election campaigns are when it comes to uniting together to work with TOP to fill the void of the self destructing Liberal party.
Hanson with 4 Senators wont be interested in uniting with anyone, she may even have her eye on Babet to achieve Senate Party status, but his contractual ties with CP will be very expensive to break.
So that leaves the rest of the conservative right leaning minors to get their heads together to bring about real change... or not... and instead rinse and repeat in 2028 for about the same outcome as 2025...
Lets hope common sense prevails and key decision makers get that electoral history has proven that voters do not vote for brands but instead are drawn to unifying values that extend across the political divide..
And Gerard Rennick needs to be taking a lead role in the new movement as well..
Please read "Why I Am Not A Conservative" by FA Hayek.
A pro-active article, Scott, amidst a flurry of pieces circulating right now that just point out the bleeding obvious of what our problems are. We all know what the problems are; we need a lot more solutions put up. As you say, point out the “how” with specific examples. We absolutely must shift that conversation and fast.
Great points and a thought-provoking question. It's a tough conversation to have when most of your conversation partners are receiving some form of "largesse" from the government and you're the odd one out.
"I just want to keep more of what I earn, so that I can help those around me" gets laughed at.
"But the government does that for you." and it goes from there (because telling them you don't trust the Government is always amusing).
I'm going to start thinking about phrasing things in terms of growth and not cuts - see how that goes.
Stay in touch, I'd love to hear about it!
It didn't do your brand any favors when your key candidates attacked Trumpet of Patriots relentlessly from the moment the party announced its launch in February. Consistent relentless slanderous attack. Maybe have a think about whether that sends a message of unity to the Australian people and you may end up doing better than your Australian and USA counterparts who have recently polled around the same 1 percent of the vote. Australia needs unity not point scoring egos who see any other movement as a threat that needs to be destroyed! Unsuccessfully, if I might add, given TOP polled second to one nation in a campaign that was less than 10 weeks from launch in February. Bottom line - be open to unity not division. it will serve the Australian people far greater than pot shots from glass houses.
Libertarians worked hard to bind the centre-right minor parties. Clive Palmer was uninterested. And at this last election, one could be forgiven for thinking TOP were supporting Labor.
Thanks for engaging! But bending the knee to Clerv/Suellen isn’t my idea of unity. You might be new here, but with a headline policy like capping interest rates at 3%, it’ll be tough to win over libertarians.
Well said.
A woman at a networking evening said "I don't mind my taxes going towards [insert insipid government vote buying scheme here]" We were in polite company, and had to bite my tongue NOT to say "Well, would you put a gun to everyone's head who would mind that? Because that's what taxes are." I know I would've sounded like a lunatic, considering most people have zero conception of how a political economy works. How to get that across in the moment with empathy... it would come to me in a shower three weeks later.
My tongue knows your pain! How about this: "What if taxes were lower, and we could use that extra money to fund causes we care about? We’d better support what matters to us and let the government focus on more crucial issues."