Populist campaigns usually bank on a charismatic figure. So Clive's push won't go far

And if you think I'm being unkind, let me draw your attention to his latest political iteration, the "Trumpet of Patriots". I am going to barf.

What is this confection? On Wednesday, Palmer announced this as the party he would 'lead' to the next federal election. When I say lead, what I really mean is fund. And where does the money come from? From the pillaging of our national resources.

And what's the most important thing on his mind? Banning transgender athletes from women's sporting events. Not climate. Not poverty. Not world peace. Not defeating racism. Sport.

WTF?

But I knew, just knew, that something wicked this way comes. During the Australian Open, there was a Palmer ad, Clive vomiting up a bunch of cliches. There is not much in that ad you could disagree with. We don't want people hungry. We should all be lovely to each other. But it was spoken without a hint of empathy. Rushing through the script as if time is money. I guess even billionaires feel like that.

He opens: "Three million Australian households have just one meal a day."

I asked the folks at Foodbank, which provides food and groceries to about 6000 charities and school breakfast programs, about that figure.

People interpret their annual report in a million different ways. But I couldn't find that figure anywhere. Foodbank says 3.4 million Australian households experience food insecurity. They reduce the quantity, the quality or the variety of food they eat. With severe food insecurity, that can mean not eating for several days. Does it matter that Palmer is loose with accuracy? Isn't it important that he's drawing attention to this shocking state of affairs?

One-hundred per cent yes. But I can't get out of my head an idea for how Palmer could help fix this. He could spend the money from a 30-second slot during the Australian Open and give it all to Foodbank.

I'm sure he's already giving money but I just couldn't find it anywhere on Foodbank's list of donors and supporters. Even the shonks at MinRes (another West Australian miner) put their hands in their pockets. In fact, he could give the $100 million dollars he put into political campaigning last time (which delivered him the utterly hopeless Rolf, Ralph, whatsisname) and boost the coffers of places like Foodbank.

Palmer closes with: "All Australians must accept responsibility for the catastrophe we are facing. Before you lay your head on your pillow tonight say a prayer for your country and reach out to fellow Australians with compassion."

The mendacity of it all. This is a bloke who loves Trump, wants to fire public servants, whose main campaign plank is transgender athletes and who can't even get a good grip on the Latin motto for his party. And he wants us to show compassion? Pop him in the recycling bin.

Will Australians vote for him this time? As University of Queensland law academic Graeme Orr observed after 2019, Palmer knows how to get attention: "[His] policy-thin yet advert-rich brand of smiling populism did generate significant leverage, through preference recommendations in favour of the Coalition parties." You will also remember that just five minutes ago Palmer was trying to change his colours from yellow to teal.

Ian McAllister, distinguished professor of political science at the Australian National University, says votes for any iteration of Palmer in the past have been protest votes. This time, his party, the Trumpet of Patriots, is playing on the names of European populist parties - Brothers of Italy, Five Star Movements. But McAllister says the popularity of these parties is driven by one central charismatic figure. Palmer hasn't fulfilled that brief so far.

As far as I can tell by that lousy ad, he hasn't shown any development in that area since his last foray.

Still, there is an appetite for populism among Australian voters because they are dissatisfied with what they see as political elites.

"It hasn't surfaced in party politics in this country for a variety of reasons," he says.

We have compulsory voting (or at least compulsory turning up) and the system hasn't worked too badly in terms of redistribution of wealth.

"But there is a strong minor party vote. One in three people voted in the House of Reps for a minor party or independent in the last election and that's gradually increasing," he says.

This will be just another Palmer stunt. As I've said before, we can blame about 150,000-odd Victorians for wasting their Senate votes on the United Australia Party and the utterly meritless whatsisname.

READ MORE:

I reckon all candidates should have to show a track record whenever they stand for re-election. And make that part of your thinking when you vote.

Speaking of utter bullshit, did you see last year when Jason Falinski tried to drag Zoe Daniel's name through the mud? He referred her to NACC. On Thursday NACC spelled out quite clearly that Falinski was very wrong.

Are we all sick of a country where politicians try to hoodwink us? Where they try to weasel around decent processes? Have no intention of being fair?

I'm thinking about the next election and know this about my vote already. I would always put Palmer last (unless there was a Pauline Hanson evil twin on the list). Same for everyone of these shonky self-interest parties. Never vote for anyone who supported the existence of robodebt. Vote for politicians who know we must mitigate all the drivers of violence, who at least express some real interest in getting to net zero.

If you are confident you know who that is, let me know.