mmmmm! I just logged onto the internet to do some work (and got reading the news :)….urgh, I always get distracted). Anyways, the news headlines of course are about the voting in Australia and how it looks as though they are heading for a hung-parliament. I read through the article coz it struck me as quite weird that in another Democratic country, similar to ours ‘the people have spoken’. It’s quite bizarre (to me anyway) that we have these situations of late. I wonder what the real reason is; it seems to me it means that the voting public are no longer just taking the words and promises of their governments and voting accordingly but are perhaps being just a little more discerning about what the politicians are saying. For so long we have been spoon-fed ‘promises’ that seldom follow through and now it would appear that we are holding the candidates to task ( so to speak) and giving them the task of actually making good on their campaign rhetoric. No longer a case of voting for a certain party coz you have in the past, but rather as they said in the article, looking at what we really want (or not) in the country and then voting for the party that ‘promises’ to do the most about that situation…
Of course what happens after the ‘party’ is what really counts, but governments are not getting away with just using pretty words and speeches anymore…..we the public are becoming more forceful about what is and what is not acceptable and our memories are becoming a tad longer. Perhaps it’s coz of the internet where information is now more freely available and the mistakes of our governments are more publicized than in the past. Or perhaps it’s that like our nationalities, our governments are becoming more generic and the lines more blurred. Perhaps our governments are becoming more middle of the road, unlike in the past where they had policies that were worlds apart and you could more easily identify what their policies actually meant. Who knows? Anyway, I just found it interesting!



Interesting question. I think the media has a lot to do with it because people sort of tune out all the noise and when you get rid of the sound bites its kind of hard to know what the candidates stand for.
I think right now we lack true leaders who have drive, vision, passion and innovative ideas. Instead we have risk-averse followers, who slavishly follow the opinion polls, back-flipping on their beliefs as many times as is necessary in an attempt to keep everybody happy all of the time, just to ensure they get re-elected. (Julia Gillard’s proposed Citizen’s Assembly to sort out climate change is a classic ducking of responsibility and leadership!) So with the opinion polls acting as puppeteers for the main parties, they end up pretty much saying the same thing. I wonder if this is a reaction to Blair and Rudd? Both engendered real excitement at the time they were first elected; both failed to live up to our expectations.
I totally agree…..you said it far more succinctly than I did. The Blair years failed miserably and yet both Cameron & Clegg are similar in persona. What do we have ahead? Judy, thanks for dropping by, great to see you here 🙂