What if we redirected that energy into connecting with people we don't normally talk to?

I was volunteering in a swing seat on the weekend. There had been election-related violence up the road earlier so we all tried hard to make polite conversation.

I had a lovely chat with an older Liberal lady about plastic recycling. Even I'm not green enough to rinse my recycling in the shower, but she does.

It wasn't much, but it felt like a start. We need to be having more of these conversations. Jeering feels good, but doesn't change anything. The UK and the US are great examples of what happens if we let the divide expand.

I am responding to Michael Turtle's article "Can you safely trust a travel alert?" (May 18, Panorama, p.27) questioning Smartraveller advice Australians "Reconsider the Need to Travel" to Egypt (level 3 of 4).

Mr. Turtle asked Australians to question their trust in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's travel advice. This is a misguided and potentially dangerous message. Australia has had far too many of its citizens killed in overseas terrorist attacks.

The advice for Egypt is at "Reconsider the Need to Travel" due to the high probability of a terrorist attack or kidnapping. It has been at this level since 2000.

It is good Mr. Turtle was not affected by any of these issues. Mr. Turtle's enjoyment should not, however, be a basis for encouraging Australian travellers to question the advice carefully coordinated across the Australian Government.

The day after Mr Turtle's article was published a tourist bus in Cairo was targeted in an attack, injuring at least 12 people.

DFAT takes extremely seriously the advice it provides to Australian travellers and considers carefully the range of information it has to draw from in order to keep Australian travellers safe.

The safety and security of Australians overseas is a priority for the Australian Government.

DFAT's travel advisories are kept under close review, including in light of changes that may have implications for Australian travellers.

Scott Morrison, to use a "Keatingism", has to demonstrate he is not all tip and no iceberg.

Will his rhetoric on economic management be supported by a carefully crafted growth policy? What will he do to address growing inequality and environmental decline?

Will his support of the big end of town and belief in trickle down economics result in improved outcomes for the less well off? Will he focus on welfare fraud while doing nothing about the over-generous subsidies to those speculating in property and receiving tax refunds while paying no tax?

Is he a wolf in sheep's clothing?

Will his party room be dominated by the conservative right (Dutton, Sukkar, Abbetz, Andews et al) given the retirements of moderates including Pyne and Bishop?

Is he a member of the right given his coal carrying stunt?

It's time to move on from rhetoric, scare and slogans Mr Morrison.

What is your vision for Australia? What will you do to address the economic and environmental challenges?

Let's pray for a miracle.

Analysts who couch the 2019 election results in terms of complex policy and negative campaigns miss the point.

While Morrison was a very good snake oil salesman Shorten was never popular.

Morrison, who resorted to false claims of death taxes, retiree taxes and used other questionable tactics, sold his ideas successfully.

The ALP must move on from the new rules that mean the parliamentary party is no longer solely responsible for electing the parliamentary leader.

Parties must be able to change the leadership to take performance into account.

Rudd's removal in 2009 was sensible. So was the removal of Abbott as Liberal leader in 2015. Rudd could neither delegate nor make decisions. Abbott's capacity for silly decisions meant his chief of staff had to act as a nurse maid.

The shock swing to the Coalition defied all of the opinion polling.

This apparently illogical result needs further examination.

How did the late swing came about?

It seems to mirror similar swings in countries where there have been allegations of foreign electoral intervention through the internet and social media.

In light of the Coalition's success and Labor's failure it is timely to reflect on what the result says about the majority of voters.

It would appear they reject the need for strong action on climate change and are happy to open new coal mines that will accelerate already unacceptable environmental damage and hasten the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef.

Most voters are also willing to take tax cuts at a time when essential services cannot support the aged, the unemployed, those with disabilities, those suffering from illness and infirmities and the homeless.

They also accept a tax system which is open to rorting and is riddled with dubious concessions favouring the well-off.

The majority also permit political parties to pork barrel electorates shamelessly and turn a blind eye to those trapped on Manus Island and Nauru.

Are we still the land of the "fair go"?

It's interesting to observe at the 75 per cent mark of first preference vote counting by party in the House of Representatives that the 675,687 informal votes (5.49 per cent of total votes) far exceeds the 573,731 (4.93 per cent) votes the Nationals received at this time which will ultimately see their party win 10 seats outside of Queensland (excludes those won by notional Nationals inside the Queensland LNP).

At this point before all votes are counted and preferences distributed, the informal vote is the fourth largest group of votes behind the combined Coalition, Labor and the Greens. Total informal votes exceed those obtained by any other party, grouped independents and non aligned candidates.

Many laughed at Clive Palmer as he spent $60 million plus on advertising for his United Australia Party. Clive laughed back: "I've got four thousand million dollars". He could do whatever he liked with it.

Many people laughed at Clive when the UAP didn't pick up a single seat. Clive laughed back that his advertising had led to the election of a pro-coal, climate skeptic, conservative government.

Clive will likely make billions on the back of the millions he spent. Clive is laughing all the way to the bank, at all of us.

Perhaps the flags flying at half mast for Bob Hawke could be kept there to show sympathy for the ALP in losing the election on Saturday.

An abundance of ALP talent are back in opposition when they should be showing Australians how to run a caring, forward thinking, country.

In step with the rest of the nation I have been contemplating the outcomes of the election.

The lessons appear to be people are motivated by personal greed; voters are not interested in policies, vision for the future of the country, their children or the planet.

They choose to be swayed by messages invoking fear because they can now blame the lies and 'fear campaigning' for their worsening situation.

Finally, it is okay to suspend your Christian ethics while you knowingly run a campaign based on lies and misrepresentations if it sways the electorate to re-elect you.

The re-election of the LNP shows that many people can't face change, even change for the better.

They only care about their current hip pockets.

The LNP was re-elected more on negativity about opponents than on enlightened policies for the future. In the long run doing nothing will cost us all so much more.

I hear some Australians, not as happy as me with the election outcome, are thinking of moving to NZ. If anyone needs a hand packing, they only need to ask.

Is Australia really represented by two beer swilling, white males? (Albanese and Morrison, images, May 20, p.1) No wonder so many of us feel unrepresented.

Steggall's win in Warringah is reminiscent of Maxine McKew's against John Howard in in 2007. She lasted a single term.

Morrison claims God helped him win the impossible election. Sound familiar? Maybe, it was Russian hackers.

Can the victorious conservatives at least try to compensate the thousands of injured and homeless men and women John Howard sent to war in Iraq?

A minor consolation is we will continue to see the forensically brilliant Penny Wong, Kristina Keneally and, once again, Katy Gallagher at Senate estimates hearings.

Reflecting on ScoMo's almost single-handed election campaign blitz, I say: "Never in Australia's political history have so many been gulled by so few!"

Alex Wallensky (Letters, May 21) is spot on. Morrison's victory is as good as a Collingwood premiership. Yes, it's that bad.

If Shorten and Bowen are of Labor's right faction, think about what its left faction and the Greens would have done to us.

The biggest loser was the public good. The deluge of misinformation, fake news, character assassination, biased reporting, fear mongering and outright lies was the worst I can remember. The Coalition won, but not with clean hands.

The last time I recall a front page story about a new bridge over Lake Burley Griffin ("Common bridge vision", May 21, p.1) was in the late 1980s on April Fools Day.

If the votes are compared to recent polls there appears to be a two to three per cent discrepancy. If that was applicable over the last few months the results were always going to be close. Where is the miracle?

Folau is good at rugby. His legs were cut off by Rugby Australia because he expressed his religious views. What about Tennis Australia doing the same for the player who continuously humiliates all of us?

Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attachment. Fax: 6280 2282. Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.

Keep your letter to 250 or fewer words. References to Canberra Times reports should include date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).

To send a letter via the online form, click or touch here.