With Peter Dutton you get what you expect

When Peter Dutton became Leader of the Opposition, what did you expect from him? How has he turned out for you?

In February, I penned a piece with a headline much like the one you see now. At that time, I was sure that Australia, a nation known for its flawed political choices, would never elevate a widely reviled figure to a position of power. As we stand on the brink of selection for this election, my conviction remains unshaken. Dutton would be a poor choice as leader of this nation.

In that piece, When Peter Dutton became Leader of the Opposition, what did you expect? l wrote that:

“When he won the leadership battle for his party., Peter Dutton could be regarded as the most unpopular politician in Australia. In a startling twist, he even overshadowed the unpopularity of Scott Morrison and Barnaby Joyce at the time.

Following a decisive defeat that resounded through the nation, signalling Australia’s stark discontent with the Coalition’s leadership, the Liberal Party, on May 30, 2022, made the astonishing choice to appoint this bizarre figure as its leader.

One might describe this decision as breathtakingly audacious, while another might muse that the position was simply left vacant, with no one else willing to step up. Some light-heartedly jested that Dutton was merely a spud yearning to reinvent himself as a sweet potato, showcasing an unexpected ambition to transform and thrive in a different light.”

Mike Long on Facebook made this observation reasonably representative of public opinion:

“Since the publication of that piece, my initial assessment of the Opposition Leader has been validated by his numerous statements that can only be described as falsehoods. His fixation on the ABC and The Guardian online news platforms is deplorable. To label them as purveyors of hate is indefensible and reminiscent of Trump’s tactics.”

His fundamental blunders and misjudgements mirror a high school debate captain fumbling with their arguments. Throughout the election campaign, he’s performed a political backflip, reversing crucial policy announcements with alarming frequency. Most notably, he declared that the Coalition would eliminate a tax incentive for motorists purchasing electric vehicles, a decision seemingly crafted to unearth savings for a promised surge in defence spending. This move raises eyebrows and stirs scepticism about the motivations behind such a drastic shift.

Pollsters will tell you that not just Donald Trump or work-from-home policies have been responsible for the Coalition’s decline in the opinion polls since the election campaign began.

There’s an undeniable impression that Peter Dutton and the Coalition seem ill-prepared to assume the reins of government: a glaring absence of policy specifics and a series of campaign blunders that have left voters scratching their heads.

The first ABC Leaders Debate emerged as a pivotal moment, a chance for the electorate to gauge who might embody the qualities of a prime minister – or whether Dutton could even be seen as a feasible candidate for that role. Subsequent debates have confirmed he is not.

As the election campaign reached its midpoint, the second debate unveiled an opposition leader still grasping the sentiment that voters are feeling worse off than they were three years ago. In contrast, the prime minister, though unable to fully articulate his strategies for addressing the underlying issues plaguing the economy, demonstrated a clear superiority in navigating the complexities of a world growing ever more uncertain. The contrast between them was stark, with the prime minister displaying a command over international affairs that Dutton struggled to match. This applies to most issues where Albanese displays calmness and intellectual superiority that Dutton doesn’t have other than becoming angry.

I was genuinely astonished when I turned to Wikipedia, diving headfirst into a staggering compilation of his brazen and offensive racist remarks, each one a testament to the unsettling consistency of his views over the years. A wave of disbelief swept over me, leaving me grappling with the ramifications of his words. How could this be happening? Why does the Liberal Party not only accept individuals like him but actively promote them to positions of influence? The answers elude me, cloaked in an intricate mystery that begs to be unravelled.

This part is similar to my previous piece, but I have rewritten it in light of further insights:

“While it’s easy for individuals to sculpt a polished façade around him, I ponder a deeper question: why can’t people present their authentic selves in Canberra? This sentiment also rings true for Morrison and Abbott, who courted public perception over sincerity.

As for Peter Dutton, my sentiments toward him are far from warm – in fact, it would be an understatement to say I’m not enchanted by his presence. His long-standing inclination to view his fellow humans through a lens of harsh judgment, deeming many unworthy of compassion, speaks volumes about his character.

Let’s be candid; the recent election was a bitter pill for the Liberal Party, thrusting them into a stark reality check. Their moderate faction crumbled under the decisive wave of teal independents. It was spurned by Chinese-Australian voters, who recoiled at the dismal diplomacy that allowed Labor to snatch away pivotal seats like Bennelong and Chisholm. The party has been further battered by a surge of principled, unwavering individuals who have reached a breaking point with Dutton’s relentless drift towards the far right.

Assessing a person’s actions and words demands a meticulous examination of the evidence, combined with the understanding that perspectives can shift with the infusion of new insights. Yet, as one navigates the chronological tapestry of his life on Wikipedia, summoning any semblance of admiration or respect for him becomes increasingly arduous. The timeline unfolds a narrative steeped in disillusionment, where inconsistencies and disappointments cast a long shadow over his journey, challenging even the most steadfast supporter to overlook the flaws that define his path.”

Now, it’s Saturday morning

As dawn breaks on Saturday morning, the wafting aroma of sizzling snags fills the air, beckoning people eager to gather at their local polling places. The sun casts a warm glow over the scene, where voters eagerly flow towards their respective venues, a tapestry of anticipation and civic duty woven throughout the crowd.

The political landscape, however, has been anything but electrifying. The campaigns of both parties have dragged on like a tedious play without an intermission, each act duller than the last. The debates, meant to illuminate contrasting visions for the future, have instead been marked by bombast and repetition, offering nothing new or inspiring to the electorate.

Dutton, with an intensity that borders on desperation, has relentlessly branded Albanese a dishonest figure, leveling accusations that paint the ABC and The Guardian as purveyors of hate, division and animosity. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister, clad in his usual calm demeanour, works to reassure voters, his words echoing with promises and assurances that he’s steering the ship in the right direction.

As the day unfolds, all declarations have been made, and by evening, the nation will stand poised on the brink of revelation, eager to discover which party will be bestowed with the honour and responsibility of steering the country for the next three years. The air is thick with tension and hope, as ballots are cast and futures decided.

My thought for the day

In my observation, the wisest individuals I encounter are those who wield reason and logic like a finely honed sword, skilfully navigating life’s complexities while allowing space for uncertainty and reflection. They embrace the unknown, recognizing that doubt can lead to deeper understanding and growth. In stark contrast, the truly unwise are the zealots and fools – blinded by their unyielding beliefs – who cling resolutely to certainty, shunning the very essence of inquiry that fosters wisdom.

Dear reader, we need your support

Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.

One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.

With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.

Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969