The polls predicted the Coalition win

The media seem beside themselves in what they describe as inaccurate forecasting of the results of the recent Australian election, As one media source says in headline news:

2019 Political Opinion Polls Show Themselves to be Deeply Flawed.

There were two polls remember. These flaws were only in one set of polls. The second showed who was preferred Prime Minister. And this has consistently shown us that Scott Morrison was the preferred Prime Minister. Even after the debacle of the Coalition's ousting of Malcolm Turnbull, the polls showed us that Morrison was the preferred Prime Minister.

The media frequently confused the two polls.The media tells us that:

Pollsters 95 per cent unsure how they got it wrong The nation's pollsters are facing calls for greater transparency and an overhaul of their number-crunching after spectacularly missing the result of the federal election.

The Essential poll published by The Guardian and the Ipsos poll published by The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and The Australian Financial Review, consistently pointed to the same outcome – a Labor victory.

In another example, the Asia Times reported just after the Turnbull replacement that "opposition leader Bill Shorten is still poised to win the May 18 election" that same news source reported that Morrison was chosen as Australia's "accidental Prime Minister" on August 24, 2018 and was polled as preferred Prime Minister then. He subsequently increased his lead as preferred PM to 13 points over Labor leader Bill Shorten by 45 to 32 per cent.

This polling difference is massive. The election was fought between the two leaders. As former Liberal leader John Hewson put it: "Morrison ditched the Liberal Party and ran on his own."

We are genetically wired to follow our leaders. We have been following leaders for thousands of years, usually to our advantage, but sometimes with massively disastrous results.Developments in both the natural and social sciences suggest that leadership and followership share common properties across humans and other animals, pointing to our ancient roots and evolutionary origins. Leadership with an evolutionary perspective is a new science. One finding was that the dominant or more powerful individual becomes the leader. Now, with democracy giving all of us an equal say we can now vote for our leader, or at least respond to a pollster asking who we preferred. We told those pollsters who we preferred. It is little wonder that Scott Morrison with a 13-point advantage, won the election. The polls had told us so. People told the pollsters that they were going to support the Labor Party, for its policies were their preferred options. Again, research by the bucket load tells us that we evolved as moral animals, wanting to care for our fellow human beings. Some examples of this research are Matt Ridley (The origins of virtue) , Neil Levy (What makes us Moral), Frans de Waal (Primates and Philosophers, How Morality Evolved), Richard Joyce (The Evolution of Morality) and E. O. Wilson (Sociobiology). So we supported the Labor Party's platform, and said yes to the pollster; but when it came to voting, many of us realised that meant supporting a leader we did not want.

There may have been other reasons for the swing away from the Labor party than a dislike of Bill Shorten. One was his dividend imputation scheme. Under such a scheme, tax paid by a company may be attributed, or imputed, to the shareholders by way of a tax credit to reduce the income tax payable on a distribution. Pensioners pay no tax, so for some years, have received a payment from the government equivalent to the credit. Shorten campaigned to end that payment on the argument that people who pay no tax should not get a payment. Pensioners strongly objected. This observer disagrees with the Labor argument. A company pays its dividends after the payment of its tax, so shareholder dividends are reduced by that tax, When pensioners are paid their dividends, tax had already paid. Pensioners, who pay no tax, have their dividends reduced by tax already paid. They were entitled to compensation.

The second issue was the Adani mine, a massive coal deposit in central Queensland, The Greens and Labor objected to it being opened for mining. Queenslanders wanted the jobs it would provide. Labor lost strongly in Queensland, and now has no seats North of Brisbane. The Adani coal would be exported, but it still does raise a difficult ethical issue: jobs versus the mining of coal. If you have a family with children to support, where would you stand on Adani and its jobs?

Adani and dividend imputation aside, a more demanding question is why Bill Shorten was so much on the nose. Asks the guests at your next dinner party and you will get a dozen reasons: He is not likeable, he is arrogant and a bully, has elements of a trade union thug about him. Remember it was only in2014 when we had the Royal Commission on Trade Unions, one of which was the AWU, of which Bill Shorten had been national secretary. The Commissiont recommended criminal charges against some unionists, although not Shorten.

Those of us who are old enough will also remember the Costigan Royal Commission to investigate criminal activities associated with the Painters and Dockers Union. Costigan noted that:

The Union has attracted to its ranks in large numbers men who have been convicted of, and who continue to commit, serious crimes.

This opinion piece gives you additional reasons for rejecting Bill Shorten as Prime Minister, other than that he is a former Trade Union leader with all the baggage that carries; that he is a backstabber. Shorten was instrumental in knifing two former Prime Ministers – Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard. The Courier Mail headline on Sept 15, 2015, said it all: "Bill Shorten, who knifed two PMs, gives moral advice to Malcolm Turnbull"

A deeper reason is his trade union affiliation. Only about 15 % of the Australian workforce are members of trade unions, a decline in the last two decades from about 40%. It was60% of the workforce in 1954. Trade union membership is becoming increasingly irrelevant to Australians, yet affiliated unions account for 50% of delegates at federal and state Labor Party conferences.

In short, a group of people representing only 15 % of the workforce, has a disproportionate influence on one of Australia's only two major political parties.

An allied reason why Shorten's trade union background was rejected by most Australians is Labor's concept of trade unionism. That we need help in combatting what was described in the recent election as "the big end of town" is an outdated concept. Most of us aspire, if not to become one of the big end, at least of reaching up in that direction. In short, of achieving more with our lives than our parents did and certainly of achieving more than what we had when we left school.

We are all ambitious for ourselves. Humanity has demonstrated over the centuries this desire to build on itself, to improve our lives. History has many examples of working people fighting for just treatment Trade unionism achieved a great deal, getting children out from down the mines with the Chartists,. Only a few of those issues remain. Trade unions are now less needed.

We all, or at least most of us, are also caring people. Our vote on same sex marriage demonstrated that. The opinion polls that showed a preference for Labor's more thoughtful policies also were in accord with how we believe. Its opinions on climate change, on refugees, on fair wages, on multiculturism, on the ABC, reflect national beliefs. They were what the opinion polls demonstrated. These policies are not supported by the do-nothing conservative right wing of the Coalition.

We should join a political party and change the world that way. The Liberal Coalition is one option. Tony Abbott has gone, but there are still many conservative troglodytes holding it back. Unless the Coalition changes its support of its ultra conservatives it is a gone goose. The Labor Party is an alternate option.

The media is already questioning whether Anthony Albanese will be an effective leader in opposition. This writer believes that he will romp home at the next election. The ordinary members of the party voted for him over Shorten some years back. He supports most of the beliefs of ordinary Australians, and is a leader that people want. We could join the Labor Party, attempt to change its name, and the influence of trade unions, and help to build the Australia that it set out in its last election manifesto.

The polls showed a majority of Australians supported the Australia of that manifesto but did not vote for it as it brought with it a Prime Minister they did not want.