ANDREW CARSWELL: Why conservatives are losing ground as Albanese rides public support on tough calls

It’s probably best that conservatives temper their anger for a little while and take stock.

Because what infuriates them about Anthony Albanese is precisely what’s winning him public support.

This remains an uncomfortable reality within the Coalition; yet another lesson in the dangers of straying too far from ever-evolving mainstream opinion, and holding unswervingly too long-held political positions.

Of being right and wrong at the same time.

This is not a diatribe against conservatism, nor an attack on its relevance or its ability to claw back the political ascendancy. It is, and it will.

But more an admission of its current clunkiness in today’s politics and its inability to deal with the shifting sands under its feet.

This disconnection with the public is playing out on numerous fronts, all serving to elevate Albanese in the minds of voters, as recognised in this week’s Newspoll result, which showed support for the PM’s performance back in positive territory.

Here is the rub.

For conservatives, Albanese’s premature recognition of Palestinian statehood is unconscionable; a decision that not only rewards terrorist group Hamas, but vindicates its long-running, murderous campaign against Israel and its own people, and wilfully ignores the 50 innocent Israelis still held hostage.

But to most, the decision felt justified. They’ve grown weary of the war and its stark images, and frustrated with Israel’s overreach, which has eroded much of the moral authority it once owned.

But despite the brutal headlines and concerted media criticism over his Gaza decision, Albanese’s public support has only climbed.

For conservatives, Albanese’s refusal to bow the knee to Trump’s America and lift defence spending in line with US requests is unconscionable; a decision that puts at risk Australia’s most important defence and trade relationship, leaving us exposed in the event of regional conflict, and open to further trade tariffs.

But to most, standing up to the bullying tactics of Trump is not only preferable, but admirable. Australians are no fans of Donald J Trump and remain deeply suspicious of the brand of the confrontational and divisive politics he represents.

At the very least, Albanese garners a level of sympathy from ordinary folk disconnected from politics, for being in the unfortunate position of having to deal with Trump. Slack is cut.

Meanwhile, conservatives seethe at what they see as the reckless erosion of Australia–US relations and the Prime Minister’s stubborn refusal to lift defence spending in line with growing threats. Apparently, John Howard’s famous declaration that “we will decide” doesn’t have the same ring to it when it comes to sovereign decision-making on defence spending.

For conservatives, Albanese’s kowtowing to China is unconscionable, given rising Chinese imperialism, its aggressive defence posture that threatens world order, and its recent history of economic coercion of Australia and its allies. And, well, COVID.

But to most, the normalisation of ties with our largest trading partner is welcome, given the inherent understanding that our economic fortunes remain bound to the bulk commodities shipped from our shores to fuel China’s mega-city boom. Self-interest overrides suspicion.

Australian households aren’t gathered around the dinner table discussing lengthy articles in Foreign Affairs that suggest Chinese military might will reach a tipping point in military ascendency in 2027 when an invasion of Taiwan is likely to occur. Not that capabilities signal intent.

So long as Australia’s prosperity remains tied to China — a reality well understood by the public — Australians are likely to endorse Albanese’s more collegial stance toward the Asian giant. Whether they are a good faith actor or not.

For conservatives, Albanese’s fulsome embrace of net zero is unconscionable, given the punishing annual increases in electricity prices hitting Australian families, the erosion of our manufacturing competitiveness, and the absence of any meaningful impact on global emissions. All pain, no gain.

But to most, net zero is seen as a moral duty; a way of reassuring themselves that something is being done, in their name, to confront climate change, without requiring them to wrestle with the complexity or cost of solutions personally.

Nobody has made the case otherwise. If they are making the case, nobody is listening.

This is why the agitation within the Coalition to dump net zero as a policy position is a road to ruin. It bucks up against a general acceptance of the need to reduce emissions. That decision was made and accepted a long time ago.

Do we honestly think a group of conservatives that were all but chased from city suburbs at the last election, slammed for being out of touch, will be able to convince Australian households to forgo those notions? To suddenly believe net zero is a farce?

Maybe it is a farce. But those advocating that position aren’t exactly dripping in credibility at present. If the face of anti-net zero is Barnaby Joyce ranting and raving red-faced on Sunrise then the case against net zero is doomed before it begins.

Which only leaves Albanese looking steadier, more reasonable, and more in tune with the public mood.

Even if all of his decisions are not in Australia’s best interests.