2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Rudd? (2 Viewers)

[Triangulum]

Apparently Shanahan's definitions of 'in tatters', 'humiliation' and 'crisis' are different to everyone else's. If there was actually a crisis, I suspect that at least one other news outlet would be reporting it as such by now.

 

[Silver Persian]

Sigh...why is Labor letting Swan debate Costello. He's going to get eaten alive - Costello can be very aggressive and scary in parliament.

 

[Triangulum]

Sigh...why is Labor letting Swan debate Costello. He's going to get eaten alive - Costello can be very aggressive and scary in parliament.

I doubt anyone will pay attention to it - certainly no one's going to watch it - unless one of them makes a big stumble. Swan has a master's in economics, so I don't think he'll be a complete pushover on an intellectual level, and punters don't really like the whole attack-dog thing. (Keating was advised to go easy on Hewson for that reason, I believe.)

Edit: I await with anticipation the foreign affairs debate. Downer's never displayed any actual grasp of foreign policy, so we'll see how that turns out.

 

[Iron]

Yes in formal debates they're much more restrained than in Parliament. Often great debaters like Stello and Keating are weaker in these formats because they lose all their psychological bully powers in an effort to look safe and presentable.

I imagine he'll be pitching his 'why I should be PM' stuff too. Should be awesome.

 

[Generator]

Yes in formal debates they're much more restrained than in Parliament. Often great debaters like Stello and Keating are weaker in these formats because they lose all their psychological bully powers in an effort to look safe and presentable.

I imagine he'll be pitching his 'why I should be PM' stuff too. Should be awesome.

Keep in mind that there's more to Parliament than Question Time - Mr Costello has always seemed strong whenever the House is in the midst of a formal debate. Of course, such debates aren't based on the question, serve and volley format, but they still demonstrate just how effective some of our politicians can be when the need arises.

Mr Swan does seem capable of holding his own, but I don't think that he has what it takes to outshine the Treasurer.

 

[Enteebee]

It will probably go to Costello... however I imagine Swan won't be too hurt because he'll probably just be nailing home 'interest rates' the entire time.

 

[Iron]

Costello killed Swan on the opening speeches. But wtf, 9's worm. It plummets as soon as the camera catches Stello's turkey-necked face.

 

[Generator]

It's clear that the audience members seem to think that Mr Swan has the better face, however, once Nine's audience actually starts to listen to what both men have to say, the worm does seem to travel along a more believable path.

Edit: That said, Mr Costello's baseline seems to be at 0 and Mr Swan's at +2.

 

[katie_tully]

Oh man. Youre talking about the debate here. Ignore my thread.

The worm is rigged.

 

[Enteebee]

Costello killed Swan on the opening speeches. But wtf, 9's worm. It plummets as soon as the camera catches Stello's turkey-necked face.

Agreed, I think Costello did a nicer speech... actually floundered a bit with the questions because imo he's gone a bit too technical for the debate a few times.

 

[Triangulum]

While on the topic of Costello, Labor leaked some polling about him to the Courier-Mail:

DAMAGING Labor polling shows swinging voters are turning off Treasurer Peter Costello, accusing him of being a "bit up himself" and more arrogant than the Prime Minister.

Despite Mr Costello playing a more central role in this campaign than previous elections, voters still consider him "out of touch" and the "final straw" for some in switching to Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd.

...

The polling found 70 per cent of "swing" voters believed the Treasurer was "arrogant".

Other phrases used to describe the Treasurer included "smug", "snide", "unapproachable", "out of touch" and "untrustworthy".

"The most significant negative for Costello is the strong perception of arrogance, which is viewed as a fatal leadership flaw," the research notes said.

 

[katie_tully]

Costello had a good opening speech but I find he lacks 'continuity' with the rest of the debate. He seems to struggle answering the questions, like there is a stark contrast in the tone and flow when he has to answer something on his feet. I dont know whether people might find that a little incompetent?
You can tell when he gets onto a topic he knows well, he is like a bulldozer.

 

[Enteebee]

54 to 46 in Labor’s favour.
Newspoll

 

[Iron]

Agreed, I think Costello did a nicer speech... actually floundered a bit with the questions because imo he's gone a bit too technical for the debate a few times.

Ive never seen this side of stello. He's taking the questions very well. Confident, careful, reassuring, almost charming. But this worm clearly does not like him at all. The Coalition will no doubt cry bias, but it may be more evidence that people really are switched off to this government.

 

[katie_tully]

Ive never seen this side of stello. He's taking the questions very well

No way. If you listen to Swan he's dribbling crap, but atleast he is making it sound convincing. Costello is kinda annoying me, I just want a response that flows nicely, no ums and ahs and drawing out words whilst he collects his thoughts. What he is saying is fine, just the way he is saying it doesn't leave me with a lot of confidence.
When he gets onto something that he really has confidence in, it's fantastic. He just needs that CONTINUITY throughout.

 

[Enteebee]

but it may be more evidence that people really are switched off to this government.

I think that's basically it, it doesn't matter much anymore what they do.

One thing I have found odd in this recent debate though... There wasn't a total negative towards supporting workchoices and when wayne swan talked about scrapping it there was little positive response.

Maybe it's because people just click the thing when they get excited (and they've been inundated by anti-workchoices stuff for a while) or maybe this audience was a bit off on that issue from the mainstream.

 

[katie_tully]

Maybe it's because people just click the thing when they get excited (and they've been inundated by anti-workchoices stuff for a while) or maybe this audience was a bit off on that issue from the mainstream.

Swan hasn't said anything of his own. He is playing on the fears of a nation; petrol prices, food prices, interest rates, etc...

It was actually interesting the other night, Insight had a program on the drought and foodprices which would lead me to believe that it's not something that can be controlled by instigating a full time watch dog.

 

[Iron]

No way. If you listen to Swan he's dribbling crap, but atleast he is making it sound convincing. Costello is kinda annoying me, I just want a response that flows nicely, no ums and ahs and drawing out words whilst he collects his thoughts. What he is saying is fine, just the way he is saying it doesn't leave me with a lot of confidence.
When he gets onto something that he really has confidence in, it's fantastic. He just needs that CONTINUITY throughout.

My feeling is that the pauses were planned to make him appear considerate and genuine. I thought it enchanced his credibility as the nation's foremost economic manager. But none of it's cutting through.

I was also surprised on workchoices - barely no change. Labor scored practically nothing out of it. That's bizarre.

Swan was competent and held his own, but spoke in a lot of soundbites. Stello avoided this and, to my thinking, won convincingly

 

[katie_tully]

Yeah. The worm is a socialist.

 

[jimmayyy]

Has Labor ever been in a better position to win the election?

they were in an equally as good a position in 2001