When Common Sense Meets Politics and a Born to Rule Mentality, We Are The Losers

Angus Taylor | Photo: Jay Kogler

“One Nation will cause an eternity of pain”

When common sense meets politics, and a born to rule mentality, we are the losers.

11.7.26

“Before you try to sing a song, listen to and heed the music and lyrics”  It seems the likes of Angus Taylor, Tony Abbot, Jane Hume and Andrew Hastie think otherwise. They may be able to read Hansard or the intricacies of how parliament works, but they don’t seem able to read how our nation feels about this parliament and the opposition’s role in it. They aren’t listening at all considering their attacks on who and what should be an ally in removing this destabilizing and destructive socialist Labour government.

Jane Hume

Andrew Hastie

Deeply infected by a” born to rule arrogance”, together with political motive, common sense plays no part in their narrative. That’s not an opinion, but a statement of fact. How many times has Opposition Leader, Angus Taylor told us that he and his Liberal/ National coalition are the only one’s that can save us from Labour’s worst government in our history? Angus also has a plan. Where have we heard these words before? Try 2022, from the mouth of Anthony Albanese and look where that took us.

What Angus is saying and doing, sounds very much like business as usual, just the thing we don’t want, the very reason much of his base has moved to Pauline’s One Nation and are likely to stay there as Angus insults their intelligence and democratic right of choice. A read of Dale Carnegie’s “How to Win and Influence People “ may help.

Taylor’s latest One Nation rant hyphenated by it causing an “eternity of pain” is a typical example of, when common sense is asked by one, and the other rejects it, what remains as a solution? The one being Pauline Hanson who, from the UK, in response to Taylor’s latest attack said she was disappointed in his remarks, and that they should work together to remove this Labour government. What this should also tell you is that Pauline is listening to the people while Taylor is deaf to it.

There was another attack by Taylor, some weeks ago when he tried to challenge Hanson’s credibility as a genuine tell it like she sees it politician by suggesting she was now part of the political establishment and that he was relatively new to the profession of only 10 years. Now, I would call that selective memory and denial. Taylor’s 10 years were  of a continuous spiral of the Liberal/ National Party coalition into the depths of woke and Marxist ideology in becoming Labour light. I don’t recall him putting his foot hard on the brakes. Meanwhile Pauline’s One Nation was consistently pushing those same policies she has been shouting for and ridiculed about for years.

Sky’s Peta Credlin once said words to the effect that the Liberal/National coalition would not be going in their current direction but for One Nation. This became apparent with the coalition adopting policies that are so similar to One Nation’s that there seems no logical reason why they should not work together in a common goal of removing this government.

Peta Credlin

The biggest difference between Taylor’s and Hanson’s approach is that the former is telling us his is the only solution, what we should be thinking. and what we should do, while Pauline listens to what the people want, and echoed what they think, long before they thought it.

 Working with the coalition is not One Nation’s greatest challenge, that remains the coalition’s. Time is her enemy, and those who follow her have great expectations having experienced great disappointment in the status quo.

Pauline as the leader faces four valid challenges. Can she deliver in what she offers? Can she find the right people to help her achieve it? Is she biting more off than she can chew? And can she make her policies come to fruition?

If it comes to drive and commitment, the answer to the first question is that Pauline can. But, that will depend on the following three. The second and third questions are closely associated and will answer the third.

Logistics,  finding the right people, a predominantly hostile media’s expectations, and Albanese’s tilted sense of fair play will dominate the narrative between now and the next federal election.

One Nation’s selection of candidates in the past has had mixed results. While they are learning, their sudden rise almost demands they find a full field of reliable candidates. With only two staff paid for by the Albanese government, this is a daunting task that leaves One Nation open to negative press by a hostile media should one candidate fail to meet expectations. And as the most popular party, those expectations will be high.

House of Representatives

The choice is, should One Nation be selective in its pursuit of seats or take on the whole field? There are 569 State and Territory seats along with 36 of the 72 Senate seats every 3 years. Add to that the 150 seats in the Lower House federal election and the whole field comes to 789 candidates and more over a 5 year period.(the next half-Senate election is in 2028). Even the long established party’s with adequate staffing would struggle in this, let alone One Nation’s 2 staff to vet candidates.

Senate

This is another reason why the conservative parties must find some accommodation in defeating this Labour government because individually they would be hard pressed to deliver what the people want. The biggest losers would be the people and a close second, the coalition, the outfall of which would herald the demise they now fear, and react to at their peril.

The answer to all four questions is they are possible but only if the conservative parties unite in common cause. If not, Labour will win, One Nation will survive to fight another day, the electorate will be angrier than ever and the coalition will probably be consigned to history. That future and outcome lies clearly with the coalition who would face “an eternity of pain” unless common sense triumphs over self-interest politics.

© 2026 Bob Janssen | BobJanssen.com.au