Come in, spinner

Earlier, Glenn Reynolds accused me of spinning because I wrote that "the [Australian] election was not about Iraq---it was hardly an issue.". Now he approvingly links to a piece by Greg Sheridan

Labor did not buy a single ad on Iraq. Nor did Latham mention his troops-home-by-Christmas pledge in his policy speech. Indeed Iraq only figured in the last line on page 13 of a 16-page speech by Latham. ... It was rather strange that we have troops at war and they were hardly mentioned in the campaign.

Why, that's what I was saying! Do you think Reynolds accuses Sheridan of spinning? Of course not, because despite the troops being "hardly mentioned", Sheridan manages to conclude

The other critical conclusion to come out of this election is that it was a total vindication of John Howard over Iraq.

By what tortured logic does Sheridan come to this conclusion?

This is actually a bigger victory for Howard than if the election had been fought on Iraq and he had won. His victory in the Iraq argument was so comprehensive that Labor did not even raise it in the campaign.

Trouble is, the Coalition did not raise it in the campaign either, so you could just as well argue that Howard's defeat on the Iraq argument was so comprehensive that he did not dare bring it up in the campaign. Both sides do extensive polling, so the fact that neither side wanted to talk about Iraq shows that it was not a positive issue for either side. Sheridan is spinning furiously.

Tags

More like this

The warbloggers have been attempting to spin the result of the election here to their advantage. Cori Dauber claims that the election "was a referendum on Australia's participation in Iraq", and Glenn Reynolds claims that it was "in no small part as a referendum on the war…
Tim Blair continues to insist that the election was about Iraq. I'll look at his arguments in a moment, but first let's look at what everybody else says about this. Tom Allard and Mark Metherell in the Sydney Morning Herald:Iraq flared briefly after the Jakarta bombings---most…
The Power Line blog informs us that the Kerry campaign has mounted a "terrorist attack on Australia": "We all know that Kerry's sister is over in Australia telling the Aussies to vote for their [leftist] candidate if they want to be safer from terrorist attacks; that they need to…
The relentless spinning of the result of the election in Australia continues. In the New York Post John O'Sullivan's headline is "Bush wins again". I didn't even know Bush was running in the election here. O'Sullivan also writes: Al Qaeda has received a serious setback, Kofi Annan a…

No Tim,

You and the chatterer's got it wrong - again. Unless you support a socialist state which routinely executed its opponents.

Some of us have a problem with that - seems you don't.

So be it - We agree to disgree.

By Louis Hissink (not verified) on 15 Oct 2004 #permalink

The war on terror was always a no-go area for the ALP and was clearly demonstrated by the ALP when it dumped Crean.

There were two reasons why PM Howard went to the electorate last weekend. First was for the Australians to rubber stamp another term for the Coalition and second was for a strong member of the 'Coalition of the Willing' to clearly demonstrate solidarity with the Americans in the lead-up to the reelection of President Bush.

The reality Timmy in the wake of this supurb result is that the Left's arguments in Australia have collapsed and a considerable amount of venom from the Left in America has been rendered mote.

When you read Greg's article in full you discover that Latham did in fact drone on to the media therefore he was infact trying to make it an issue via the usual suspects.

By Shaun Bourke (not verified) on 15 Oct 2004 #permalink

I think Louis is paid by an astroturf org to annoy Tim enough that he stops posting.

By dave finberg (not verified) on 16 Oct 2004 #permalink

Louis, are you saying that anyone who says that Iraq wasn't a major issue are doing so because they supported Saddam hussein and wanted him to remain in power? Was North Korea a major issue? If you say it wasn't does that mean you're endorsing Kim Il sung?

Louis, are you saying that anyone who says that Iraq wasn't a major issue are doing so because they supported Saddam hussein and wanted him to remain in power? Was North Korea a major issue? If you say it wasn't does that mean you're endorsing Kim Il sung?

Louis, are you saying that anyone who says that Iraq wasn't a major issue are doing so because they supported Saddam hussein and wanted him to remain in power? Was North Korea a major issue? If you say it wasn't does that mean you're endorsing Kim Il sung?

Louis, are you saying that anyone who says that Iraq wasn't a major issue are doing so because they supported Saddam hussein and wanted him to remain in power? Was North Korea a major issue? If you say it wasn't does that mean you're endorsing Kim Il sung?