Wednesday, August 18, 2004
Today's SMH quotes an anonymous source
with a real bombshell. Jordana, the PM's senior advisor was told that the photographs of the children overboard were misleading. If this is true, then both Reith and Howard's staffers knew the truth well before the election. Now can we seriously believe that Howard still was not told? Who is left? Henry the Janitor? Unfortunately the pessimism of one of my earlier posts seems to be borne out. The 7:30 Report
last night basically said that people really couldn't give a stuff about this issue. The liberal voters think that it's a smear, labor think that Howard is evil. There doesn't appear to be an effect on that strange species, the swinging voter. How come the government is always decided at the last minute by the 2% of the population that can't make up their bloody minds. One of the downsides of compulsory voting is that there is no silent majority waiting to get pissed off enough to deliver a landslide. Polling is never an exact science, but the unknown of how many people will vote can deliver surprise results. Still, it makes the buggers accountable to everyone doesn't it? Could the swinging vote be an anomaly? Do people really change their minds that much, or is the swing the result of the changing population? If people live to be 100 years old, then there is a 1% change in the living population every year through births and deaths. Over three years, that is 3%, more than enough to change a government. Maybe peoples voting patterns are governed by major influences during there pre-voting years. For instance, seeing mum and dad lose their home because of 17% interest rates under a Labor government (whether it would have been less under Liberal is unknown) could make a life long liberal voter out of someone. Perhaps there are glut of people on the voting market that were 15-17 year olds last time the starters pistol fired, that saw the Tampa for what it was. Enough to make a difference?