The effort to expel Mr Blomeley, who is Clarence Council Mayor and a leading figure in the party's conservative faction, was centred around his comments in the leadup to the election suggesting that he might run as an independent candidate.

That statement broke the party's rules, according to Mr McKenna, and constituted a sound reason to cancel Mr Blomeley's membership.

The fracas has now spiralled into a mini-rebellion against the party leadership that could spread to other branches and ultimately to the courts.

At a meeting of the Franklin branch last Thursday, 85 party members voted unanimously for a motion of confidence in Mr Blomeley.

They also voted to reject his expulsion from the party and passed a resolution declaring no confidence in Mr McKenna unless he withdrew Mr Blomeley's expulsion by 5 pm on Friday.

Mr McKenna ignored the demand, prompting Mr Blomeley to write to party members that Mr McKenna's "ham-fisted and unconstitutional actions" would have "long-term ramifications unless immediately overturned".

One source suggested that the dispute could ultimately end up in the courts - be a significant embarrassment to the Liberals.

A second aspect of the dispute is the role of new government frontbencher Eric Abetz.

It is understood that Mr Abetz, a member of the Liberal Party's conservative faction and a strong supporter of Mr Blomeley, promised not to 'rock the boat' before his pre-selection in Franklin last year.

But he appears to have failed in that, launching a broadside against party bosses over the running of the election campaign, lamenting the Liberals' primary vote slide, and labelling the attempted expulsion of Mr Blomeley as "disgusting".

Liberal Party sources said Mr Abetz - now sworn in as a minister of the crown - also angered the government by attending the Franklin branch meeting at the Bellerive Yacht Club last Thursday evening.

When asked about Mr Abetz's participation in the meeting last week, Premier Jeremy Rockliff refused to be drawn.

"These are minor side-issues that people in Tasmania do not care about," he said.

"What Tasmanians care about is the cost of living, affordable housing, health care, growing our economy, continuing our jobs growth, and they don't care about the day-to-day politics, the shenanigans."

Opponents of the Blomeley-Abetz camp claimed that the resolutions passed at the meeting were not binding, since it was not constitutionally-recognised.

"They didn't have appropriate notice provisions, and it was called by someone who, under our constitution, has no authority to call it," one Liberal Party source said.

Mr Blomeley in turn claimed in an email obtained by this newspaper that Ms McKenna's actions showed his "disdain" for the party membership.

"The State President has refused to respond to, indeed not even acknowledge, the correspondence forwarded to him reporting on our resolution which was carried unanimously on Thursday evening," the email read.

"To treat so many hardworking and dedicated Liberals so disrespectfully is another sad example of the disregard and contempt shown for the membership."

He said the "internal and external damage being inflicted" on the Liberals were the result of Mr McKenna's actions.

These would "have long-term ramifications unless immediately overturned."

He wrote that other electorates are preparing similar motions to censure the state president's "unconstitutional" actions.

Mr Blomeley also sought legal advice about the decision to expel him from the party.

In another email to Franklin Liberal Party members obtained by this newspaper, Mr Blomeley attached the legal opinion of lawyer Bruce McTaggart SC, who claimed that Mr Blomeley's public announcements did not amount to a proposed independent nomination - the reason for his expulsion as explained by Mr McKenna.

"The comments ... make very clear that no nomination is "proposed", because no decision had been made at that time," according to the letter from Mr McTaggart.

The extent of the fallout from this internal squabble isn't yet clear - other branches may express support for Mr Blomeley, and the rebellion may spread beyond Franklin.

It could be resolved in the courts as well.

But either way, one thing is clear - the stability that Mr Rockliff hoped for when he called the election seems very distant indeed.