2007 State Election - Labor or the Coalition/Iemma or Debnam? (1 Viewer)

[kenny156]

Let's get a few things sorted

1. Yes, Labor has done barely anything good considering they have been in power for 12 years (except maybe the olympics. how they got thru that I will never know). Let's move beyond this fact

2. The Opposition has barely provided a decent alternative in 12 years (much like federal labor).

3. While Peter Debnam has announced policies and "vision" for the future, many of these policies have been announced on the spot, without any proper financing or even thinking through (eg the announcement that they will make the transport system "like it was during the olympics" ahahaha)

4. Both parties have shunned front benchers (labor because they are a liability). while it is difficult for opposition front benchers to get media attention, Bob Carr managed to do it in his 1995 eleciton win-one of the reasons he won

6. Labor a liberal will always have their tradition electorates/heartlands and because of the nature and reasons for the way the parties were set up, labor's heartland is traditionally working class, and liberals is traditionally upper class. always has been, always will be (to an extent).

7. Has anyone considered a minority government, or are the independents suddenly on the nose? last I checked, a lot of new independents (especially here in the hunter) have a good chance of winning their seats.

8. The federal government can give funding to states for roads (and frquently do, mainly for freeways etc), but while Howard and Costello are PM/Treasurer, they will not eat into their surplus for mere infrastructure. i do not know their reasons, but the states should be able to cope without this extra funding.

9. unfortunately, the nature of the ir laws is that unless the high court case is won by the unions (has it been completed??) the ir laws are being handed over the government anyway, labor or liberal.

10. scare campaigns are a fact of life. it is john howards favourite form of campaigning, and the rest of the country has caught on. unfortunately we'll have to get used to it. "playing the man" is now more popular then actually creating policies of any substance for the public to bas its vote on.

sorry about the length!!!!

 

[kenny156]

and 11. i can't count and left out a 5. ahahaha oh well

12. lets not take ourselves too seriously. what's with the personal insults???

 

[gnrlies]

The bottom line is that Labor need to go...

AND

the liberals arent showing themselves as a viable alternative.

I put the election loss (im predicting the future of course) down to two things:

1 - Leader - oppositions always need someone that people identify with, and at very least have the capacity to imagine them as the future premier. Debnam does not do this. He looks as though he's been transported from the 1950's, and his manner echo's this. Its quite plain that he lacks character. Its a shame that just about everyone I've had the opportunity to speak to during this campaign have said that they would have voted for the liberals if John Brogden was still leader, OR if Barry O'Farrel got the job. I can't see Debnam surviving after the election. Perhaps someone like Pru Goward or Barry can take the reigns. Other strong performers include Gladys Berejiklian but she won't get up.

2 - Policy - What are we changing to? NSW WANTS!!! Ever so much, to change. No-one likes the Labor Government (unless you hold blind faith in the Labor party) and NSW citizens do want change. But you know, thats the whole point. They don't see enough of a difference between Labor and Liberal. Perhaps the only perceived difference between the two if you ask the average punter is water policy. What the coalition needed to do was to put together a package that may not be so revolutionary with respect to policy, but that gives them more marketability. Something like "Fightback!" (although failed, it failed because it wasn't sold properly), or even something like "It's Time" except rather than it being time for social change, it being time for infrastructure improvement and economic change. The other thing that I would have done (if I were opposition leader) is fund promises by privatising electricity. This is something Labor would not do, so youd be able to give a far better package, and it would be far less unpopular than the 20 000 jobs thing. We needed someone like Nick Greiner to do something special.

 

[withoutaface]

The bottom line is that Labor need to go...

AND

the liberals arent showing themselves as a viable alternative.

I put the election loss (im predicting the future of course) down to two things:

1 - Leader - oppositions always need someone that people identify with, and at very least have the capacity to imagine them as the future premier. Debnam does not do this. He looks as though he's been transported from the 1950's, and his manner echo's this. Its quite plain that he lacks character. Its a shame that just about everyone I've had the opportunity to speak to during this campaign have said that they would have voted for the liberals if John Brogden was still leader, OR if Barry O'Farrel got the job. I can't see Debnam surviving after the election. Perhaps someone like Pru Goward or Barry can take the reigns. Other strong performers include Gladys Berejiklian but she won't get up.

2 - Policy - What are we changing to? NSW WANTS!!! Ever so much, to change. No-one likes the Labor Government (unless you hold blind faith in the Labor party) and NSW citizens do want change. But you know, thats the whole point. They don't see enough of a difference between Labor and Liberal. Perhaps the only perceived difference between the two if you ask the average punter is water policy. What the coalition needed to do was to put together a package that may not be so revolutionary with respect to policy, but that gives them more marketability. Something like "Fightback!" (although failed, it failed because it wasn't sold properly), or even something like "It's Time" except rather than it being time for social change, it being time for infrastructure improvement and economic change. The other thing that I would have done (if I were opposition leader) is fund promises by privatising electricity. This is something Labor would not do, so youd be able to give a far better package, and it would be far less unpopular than the 20 000 jobs thing. We needed someone like Nick Greiner to do something special.

Privatising utilities is never popular, when I was campaigning in Hawkesbury I had a handful of people in one day asking about whether Debnam intended to privatise water, electricity etc and had to direct them to Ray Williams who assured them he wasn't.

 

[frog12986]

The most damaging piece of policy in Australia's political history has a lot to do with the inability of both the Federal and State Liberal Party to recapture the electorate; Workchoices. Whether the state party likes it or not, the legislation has provided the state ALP with ammunition that they would not have otherwise had.

It will go down as the most inept piece of political judgement by John Winston throughout his prime ministership.

For some ridiculous reason (mainly because noone else would), I was campaigning in Strathfield on the weekend, and this issue was the main concern, particularly for those of NESB. For seats like mine (Drummoyne), that have a large concentration of 'yuppies' and 'new-age' families, the issue of future job security (whether right or not) cuts extremely deep. It could even stimulate a swing in the wrong direction..

 

[withoutaface]

The problem is that the Libs have 1/3 the campaign budget. If we had the same budget we could say "Morris Iemma claims he won't turn them over to Canberra" then use audio clips to explain why he will anyway.

 

[frog12986]

The problem is that the Libs have 1/3 the campaign budget. If we had the same budget we could say "Morris Iemma claims he won't turn them over to Canberra" then use audio clips to explain why he will anyway.

Absolutely. However the reforms have created a deep seated opposition to the Liberal Party in general, particularly in the demographic areas Howard worked so hard to convert.

Now I'm not saying the reforms aren't positive, however the unions have had a greater impact in conveying to the electorate that the world is still going to implode.

 

[Optophobia]

Now I'm not saying the reforms aren't positive, however the unions have had a greater impact in conveying to the electorate that the world is still going to implode.

The world is going to implode if we have another term of "Frank Sartor, Tripodi .. blah blah".

That ad doesn't even make sense.

 

[frog12986]

The world is going to implode if we have another term of "Frank Sartor, Tripodi .. blah blah".

That ad doesn't even make sense.

At least it doesn't even compare in terms of deceit and smear in comparison to the ALP ads..

Lets go through Morris Iemma's life experience...

School - - University - - Union Official - - Political Staffer - - Politician - - Premier

It's good to know we have people with such vast experience in charge of our state. Equally, this applies federally, hence why I would like to see someone like Malcolm Turnbull as Leader. Although he's perceived to be a 'out-of-touch-rich-person' he has worked hard, and achieved through such an approach (As oppose to Gough Whitlam who was of course, born with a silver spoon in his mouth).

 

[Optophobia]

What is Debnams life experience?

 

[frog12986]

What is Debnams life experience?

Lieutenant in the Australian Navy, various business ventures (some of which were unsucessful like 80% of businesses, some that were successful) and research.

I raised a thread late last year regarding the lack of life experience in political ranks (both Federally and State). We have people representing us who are more versed in political machinations than the hardships and issues faced by the electorate.

 

[kenny156]

That's because politics is now seen a legitimate career, instead of a part time hobby that you go into during a mid-life crisis.

Unfortunately these days you get those that have either practiced law or have been a union official for a couple of years before entering parliament. and that's if you're lucky.

btw i take it the two of you were campaigning for the Libs then???

 

[frog12986]

.
btw i take it the two of you were campaigning for the Libs then???

By reading my posts, I presume you would be able to guess that ..

 

[meowz0r]

The problem is that the Libs have 1/3 the campaign budget. If we had the same budget we could say "Morris Iemma claims he won't turn them over to Canberra" then use audio clips to explain why he will anyway.

It's funny. I read somewhere (Freakonomics I believe) that campaign money, in America anyway, only sways 1% of the vote anyway, regardless of how much spent. But obviously with Debnam doing nothing but wearing speedos they've done their damage...

It's funny that Labor is going to win an election on the 'lesser of two evils'. I mean, come on, if the only way they have to be re-elected is to attack the opposition (instead of come up with better policies) that only shows to me that Labor's out of steam, and that this is probably the last time they'll win with Iemma.

 

[gnrlies]

Privatising utilities is never popular, when I was campaigning in Hawkesbury I had a handful of people in one day asking about whether Debnam intended to privatise water, electricity etc and had to direct them to Ray Williams who assured them he wasn't.

Privatising is not popular, no it isn't but NSW doesn't need a conservative (economically) opposition that doesn't want to do anything different than the currently unpopular government. Privatisation is a signal of change, and thats what people want - and whilst it would be unpopular, I believe it to be more popular than the alternative of sacking 20 000 people (despite the fact that it isn't really the case).

People wouldn't vote liberal because they plan on privatising electricity, they would vote lliberal because they see them as a proactive government who has an economic agenda.

But I think leadership is the single biggest factor.

 

[Optophobia]

lol, Peter Debnam has a questions profile on Yahoo! Answers:

http://au.answers.yahoo.com/questio...mHnJmAcNbcum3nG5gt.?qid=20070319151415AA3xexK

he asked a question, and it is him, not a troll like the people who create accounts on this website like "simon crean" etc.

What specific improvements should the next government make in New South Wales?
As a politician, I know how important it is to listen to the opinions of the voters. I believe there are a great number of issues left neglected in this state - what are your suggestions to fix NSW?

 

[jb_nc]

lol, Peter Debnam has a questions profile on Yahoo! Answers:

http://au.answers.yahoo.com/questio...mHnJmAcNbcum3nG5gt.?qid=20070319151415AA3xexK

he asked a question, and it is him, not a troll like the people who create accounts on this website like "simon crean" etc.

Wow, at least he gives a shit about NSW unlike Dilemma.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

lol. dilemma. die

 

[gnrlies]

didn't the labor government try to privatise the snow river damn and the federal government killed it in their tracks

Yeah but that was for different reasons.

I dont claim that privitisation is anything other than unpopular, but I do believe it can be used to political advantage if used correctly. Nonetheless I believe it to be more popular than 20 000 job cuts (although this is not debnams plan, it certainly is what is being sold to the public by labors add's. and well ive heard not a lot to say "hey - these ads arent telling the whole truth"

 

[jb_nc]

Um, let me tell you Labor would probably LOVE to cut 20 000 public sector jobs to stop the budget deficit they are running. But they can't because of the public services union.

I couldn't give a fuck if they got rid of 20 000 backroom bureaucrat's jobs. Do you care?