Australian Politics (1 Viewer)

[Lentern]

So by that logic what makes you sure that Pyne, Bishop and Abbot can't do it?

Pyne has the little kid thing working against him, he lacks gravitas. Bishop's office has been court plagiarising a few too many times and Tony Abbott say stupid things.

 

[Lentern]

Im not sure what your trying to say. My point was that regardless of what you or anyone thinks of their policies, both Howard and Rudd, are very very talented politicians.

Howard? Longevity does not equal talent. He beat the oldest labor government in history, it was no great task, he lost the popular vote two years later, he had nine/eleven and the Tampa play into his hands which was the only demonstration of political formidability in his career, manipulation of fear, and beat boofhead Latham which a drovers dog could have done. He ran for the leadership five times once unopposed and only won it twice, he lost three elections and the popular vote four times.

 

[blue_chameleon]

Howard? Longevity does not equal talent. He beat the oldest labor government in history, it was no great task, he lost the popular vote two years later, he had nine/eleven and the Tampa play into his hands which was the only demonstration of political formidability in his career, manipulation of fear, and beat boofhead Latham which a drovers dog could have done. He ran for the leadership five times once unopposed and only won it twice, he lost three elections and the popular vote four times.

...and the guy that beat him at the last election was caught picking his ear and eating it.

:/

 

[incentivation]

Howard? Longevity does not equal talent. He beat the oldest labor government in history, it was no great task, he lost the popular vote two years later, he had nine/eleven and the Tampa play into his hands which was the only demonstration of political formidability in his career, manipulation of fear, and beat boofhead Latham which a drovers dog could have done. He ran for the leadership five times once unopposed and only won it twice, he lost three elections and the popular vote four times.

Equally Rudd beat a 12 year old government which was facing enormous opposition in the form of the Union movement. Unprecedented resource mobilisation against an incumbent.

When the challenges begin, and the rhetoric fades into obscurity, we will see the back of the Rudd Government fairly quickly. He seems ingenuine in his speeches and actions (i.e. the hugs with the turning of the head).

The polls are still very favourable. However, with what I believe to be an ineffective economic policy, I would be very surprised if Rudd exceeds two terms.

Does this mean Whitlam was not politically intelligent? After all, the Coalition had been in power for almost a quarter of a century. Howard made the most of the opportunities that were presented, and never gave in to the words of the leftist media.

If Howard had the glass jaw of Rudd, he would never had made it in the first place.

 

[Lex152]

Equally Rudd beat a 12 year old government which was facing enormous opposition in the form of the Union movement. Unprecedented resource mobilisation against an incumbent.

When the challenges begin, and the rhetoric fades into obscurity, we will see the back of the Rudd Government fairly quickly. He seems ingenuine in his speeches and actions (i.e. the hugs with the turning of the head).

The polls are still very favourable. However, with what I believe to be an ineffective economic policy, I would be very surprised if Rudd exceeds two terms.

Does this mean Whitlam was not politically intelligent? After all, the Coalition had been in power for almost a quarter of a century. Howard made the most of the opportunities that were presented, and never gave in to the words of the leftist media.

If Howard had the glass jaw of Rudd, he would never had made it in the first place.

I'm sorry but do we want good politicians leading us or good policy makers?

 

[moll.]

Both would be best. It's no use having a fool-proof plan to rescue Australia and usher in a Golden Age of develoment and prosperity if you don't have the political skill and aptitude to get it through the House and Senate.

 

[Iron]

A tired nation is a tory nation

 

[Gerald10]

Howard? Longevity does not equal talent. He beat the oldest labor government in history, it was no great task, he lost the popular vote two years later, he had nine/eleven and the Tampa play into his hands which was the only demonstration of political formidability in his career, manipulation of fear, and beat boofhead Latham which a drovers dog could have done. He ran for the leadership five times once unopposed and only won it twice, he lost three elections and the popular vote four times.

touche

 

[Lentern]

Equally Rudd beat a 12 year old government which was facing enormous opposition in the form of the Union movement. Unprecedented resource mobilisation against an incumbent.

When the challenges begin, and the rhetoric fades into obscurity, we will see the back of the Rudd Government fairly quickly. He seems ingenuine in his speeches and actions (i.e. the hugs with the turning of the head).

The polls are still very favourable. However, with what I believe to be an ineffective economic policy, I would be very surprised if Rudd exceeds two terms.

Does this mean Whitlam was not politically intelligent? After all, the Coalition had been in power for almost a quarter of a century. Howard made the most of the opportunities that were presented, and never gave in to the words of the leftist media.

If Howard had the glass jaw of Rudd, he would never had made it in the first place.

Howard had about as much conviction as a church mouse in his first five years in government. The guns thing was not a brave decision, it may have been unpopular in a few rural seats but after the massacre there was overwhelming demand to take a tough stand against guns...and he recieved labor support on the policy. The Tampa might now look harsh and callous but it was also at a time of irrational fear in the electorate and he pandered to that fear. His taking on the wharffies union earned him a plethora of support from big business the type that make four figure donations to political campaigns.

Don't forget on countless occasions he ducked for cover at the first whiff of unpopularity. Terrafied of bleeding national party votes to one nation he refused for so long to take on Pauline Hanson head to head, he made alot of round about dissaproving comments without ever really denouncing her and blew his lid when Costello did so and promised to preference her last. The GST was no genius decission, failign to implement an umbrella style policy would have been detrimental to Australian finances and Costello again would not have let him back out of it. Even in the late stages while Costello wanted to be tough and firm Howard caved in to the democrats requests. Weeks before it was to be introduced Howard asked Costello to lower it to eight percent because he thought that would be more popular. The ten point plan amendment to native title was cowardly pandering to rural liberal/national voters.

Go look at some old newspaper archives, prior to the Tampa election Howard was thought a namby pamby prime minister who lacked the gravitas and the conviction that Beazley seemed to carry about. For ten years there was doubt as to whether Howard had the support of his party, did he have the courage to call a leadership spill and settle the issue? No he did not. If he had conviction then the day he won the leadership he would have dusted off Fightback and reintroduced it. It was the most comprehensive, structured, well thought out, efficient policy document of any party in Australian history and Howard distanced himself from it because he was scared.

 

[Iron]

Lentern is a windbag who lacks the ticker for most jobs.

 

[incentivation]

Howard had about as much conviction as a church mouse in his first five years in government. The guns thing was not a brave decision, it may have been unpopular in a few rural seats but after the massacre there was overwhelming demand to take a tough stand against guns...and he recieved labor support on the policy. The Tampa might now look harsh and callous but it was also at a time of irrational fear in the electorate and he pandered to that fear. His taking on the wharffies union earned him a plethora of support from big business the type that make four figure donations to political campaigns.

Don't forget on countless occasions he ducked for cover at the first whiff of unpopularity. Terrafied of bleeding national party votes to one nation he refused for so long to take on Pauline Hanson head to head, he made alot of round about dissaproving comments without ever really denouncing her and blew his lid when Costello did so and promised to preference her last. The GST was no genius decission, failign to implement an umbrella style policy would have been detrimental to Australian finances and Costello again would not have let him back out of it. Even in the late stages while Costello wanted to be tough and firm Howard caved in to the democrats requests. Weeks before it was to be introduced Howard asked Costello to lower it to eight percent because he thought that would be more popular. The ten point plan amendment to native title was cowardly pandering to rural liberal/national voters.

Go look at some old newspaper archives, prior to the Tampa election Howard was thought a namby pamby prime minister who lacked the gravitas and the conviction that Beazley seemed to carry about. For ten years there was doubt as to whether Howard had the support of his party, did he have the courage to call a leadership spill and settle the issue? No he did not. If he had conviction then the day he won the leadership he would have dusted off Fightback and reintroduced it. It was the most comprehensive, structured, well thought out, efficient policy document of any party in Australian history and Howard distanced himself from it because he was scared.

I never denied what you've said. From re-reading my post, I didn't really pass comment on what you're talking about. I made reference to Rudd being ingenuine, however never said he lacked conviction.

I actually made a comparison with Rudd which you seemed to have totally ignored.

 

[Lentern]

I never denied what you've said. From re-reading my post, I didn't really pass comment on what you're talking about. I made reference to Rudd being ingenuine, however never said he lacked conviction.

I actually made a comparison with Rudd which you seemed to have totally ignored.

The suggestion that were Howard as weak as Rudd he would not have lasted etc when in Howard's first five years he showed no real fortitude of his own. You as many have done criticised Rudd for lacking what Howard was said to have at the end of his twelve years in government. Looking back more closely however Rudd's tendancy to appear to political and lack substance was also said of Howard at this stage in his premiership.

 

[Lentern]

Lentern is a windbag who lacks the ticker for most jobs.

I'm begining to like you less than I once did.

 

[Lentern]

I'm more convinced then ever that Costello still plans to take the leadership. A while ago I was impressed how he managed to stay in the spotlight whilst apparently just twiddling his thumbs on the backbench, not turning up to question time, going on Qanda, writing books, writing articles in the herald, goading poor old Swanny in question time. I thought he kind of went off the radar for a while but this week he is definitely trying to remain in the spotlight, he gave his ten minute eulogy in question time the other day at 2:30 when he knew it would be broadcasted nationally on the ABC, the same night he appears on lateline and this morning I find he's written an article in the herald.

Meanwhile Dr Nelson lurks on the backbench, what for? He surely doesn't think the coalition are going to give him another run in the next five years and if he did wouldn't he be bettering his chances by standing on the frontbench? He plans to be Costello's deputy when the grand ol gal makes his move. Costello is courting the dry liberals on the backbench, I reckon he probably has the numers allready. Budget deficit, Rudd starting to get a bit old, Costello gets the late leadership change, contests an election in the honeymoon people, commands his caucus with more authority than Turnbull or Nelson could.

The Costello strategy I think goes like this, he and Dr Nelson make a joint bid for the leadership in maybe a years time, Dr Nelson with his experience in Defence is the natural shadow foreign minister, Turnbull by far the most talented member of the libs locks horns with labors fuddy duddy treasurer. Andrew Robb has gravitas and can take finance minister, Bishop can take something harmless she's done her dash. Tony Abbott seems destined to occupy a frontbench position, it's inevitable, he'll be a liability wherever he is but he has too many friends in the party, I reckon Costello would whack him in Health, let him be the experienced hand taking on the bumbling young minister. He won't win but it'd give the libs a decent chance, interesting to see what will become of Joe, for my money he's been the second strongest performer for the coalition after their present leader and must surely think himself entitled to one of the top three jobs by the end of Rudd's first term.

A bit of editting in my story due to recent events. Costello certainly does still want to be king of the castle. He still manages to get more press attention than the treasurer and the shadow treasurer combined which can be interprated as a cleverly veiled way of saying "Don't forget about me, I'm still here!"

The good doctor has thrown it in, I missread that one it seems. After trying for so long to get to the top I'm surprised he gave up so easilly after having lost it. He doesn't seem the type to crave a private life but I guess like Turnbull and Costello, theres only one job in politics he really wants.

Costello plans to wait it out, he was there in the first term of Howard's government when Beazley kept hammering away on message and liberal ministers kept tripping over themselves and he is convinced that if they managed re-election then it would be folly to expect Rudd to lose it here. Instead Costello will try and churn through as many leaders as he can in Rudd's first term. If Rudd serves a full first term than Costello will support the party rooms attempt, successfully attempt I should say to replace Turnbull with Joe. If Joe contests and loses the election then Costello will look very much like the last man standing. Hockey however will probably do alot better than it ever looked like Turnbull or Nelson were going to so he'd probably stay on for a bit after losing the election which is no problem for Costello, he can continue to hang around on the backbenches, courting the favour of factional heavyweights why Joe keeps putting more and more dints in Kevin's fender.

Then lib heavyweights like Minchin start sniping at Hockey, he's too progressive, he's too genial we need someone who will take it too Kevin, he's too fat! Tony Abbott resigns from the frontbench, Chris Pyne blasts the dry libs for disloyalty and Costello smugly watches them destroy each other before entering the fight when Abbott/Hockey/Bishop/Turnbull/Minchin are all exhausted and bloody ala USA in WWI. Andrew Robb makes a bid for the deputy leadership at the same time(a valuable assett but ultimately not one who could run for the leadership in his own right) and the two enjoy something no other liberal leader has enjoyed thus far. Security.

The press go round the bend! "Game on!" writes Crabbe, "Rudd's empire built on sand" writes Switzer, "Gillard the parties only hope" writes Hartcher, "Rudd has the the political fight of a lifetime on his hands" writes Henderson. Whilst all the talk of the liberal party will be that they've finally got the cominbation right, the labor talk will be whether or not Kevin has done his dash, Senator Conroy will be leaking like a sieve, Smith will be licking Rudd's shoes in hope of annointment and Gillard will be dining with Laurrie Ferguson. I believe Rudd will be a two termer and Costello will be the one that topples him.

 

[Gerald10]

A bit of editting in my story due to recent events. Costello certainly does still want to be king of the castle. He still manages to get more press attention than the treasurer and the shadow treasurer combined which can be interprated as a cleverly veiled way of saying "Don't forget about me, I'm still here!"

The good doctor has thrown it in, I missread that one it seems. After trying for so long to get to the top I'm surprised he gave up so easilly after having lost it. He doesn't seem the type to crave a private life but I guess like Turnbull and Costello, theres only one job in politics he really wants.

Costello plans to wait it out, he was there in the first term of Howard's government when Beazley kept hammering away on message and liberal ministers kept tripping over themselves and he is convinced that if they managed re-election then it would be folly to expect Rudd to lose it here. Instead Costello will try and churn through as many leaders as he can in Rudd's first term. If Rudd serves a full first term than Costello will support the party rooms attempt, successfully attempt I should say to replace Turnbull with Joe. If Joe contests and loses the election then Costello will look very much like the last man standing. Hockey however will probably do alot better than it ever looked like Turnbull or Nelson were going to so he'd probably stay on for a bit after losing the election which is no problem for Costello, he can continue to hang around on the backbenches, courting the favour of factional heavyweights why Joe keeps putting more and more dints in Kevin's fender.

Then lib heavyweights like Minchin start sniping at Hockey, he's too progressive, he's too genial we need someone who will take it too Kevin, he's too fat! Tony Abbott resigns from the frontbench, Chris Pyne blasts the dry libs for disloyalty and Costello smugly watches them destroy each other before entering the fight when Abbott/Hockey/Bishop/Turnbull/Minchin are all exhausted and bloody ala USA in WWI. Andrew Robb makes a bid for the deputy leadership at the same time(a valuable assett but ultimately not one who could run for the leadership in his own right) and the two enjoy something no other liberal leader has enjoyed thus far. Security.

The press go round the bend! "Game on!" writes Crabbe, "Rudd's empire built on sand" writes Switzer, "Gillard the parties only hope" writes Hartcher, "Rudd has the the political fight of a lifetime on his hands" writes Henderson. Whilst all the talk of the liberal party will be that they've finally got the cominbation right, the labor talk will be whether or not Kevin has done his dash, Senator Conroy will be leaking like a sieve, Smith will be licking Rudd's shoes in hope of annointment and Gillard will be dining with Laurrie Ferguson. I believe Rudd will be a two termer and Costello will be the one that topples him.

Lentern, if for nothing else in the last two days, if for nothing else, surely you have learnt that politics is unpredicatable, surely you have?

But Costello, Turnbull, Abbott, Hockey (will be patient) and formerly Nelson are all only in it for one thing - being PM. Personally I think they will destroy each other trying.

 

[Lentern]

Lentern, if for nothing else in the last two days, if for nothing else, surely you have learnt that politics is unpredicatable, surely you have?

But Costello, Turnbull, Abbott, Hockey (will be patient) and formerly Nelson are all only in it for one thing - being PM. Personally I think they will destroy each other trying.

These past two days
-Costello has chosen to stay on the backbenches, did not surprise me.
-Bishop has lost the treasury, did not surprise me.
-Hockey replaced Bishop as shadow treasurer, did not surprise me
-Pyne replaced Hockey as MOB, did not surprise me.
-Nelson left politics, surprised me but upon reflection I think it was one of two things I could have imagined Nelson doing a month ago.

 

[incentivation]

Political commentators (or those who spend their life predicting political outcomes) are rarely correct and rarely have any credibility. Laurie Oakes, Dennis Shananhan, Paul Bongiorno, Phillip Coorey, Mark Riley et al each fall within this category.

Most of the time it is these individuals who spread rumour and innuendo and breach confidentiality, in turn causing political change (as we have encountered).

Sure, comment on what has happened. But stop trying to be like you can predict the future. It is a futile business. I mean what makes these people any more educated to pass judgement than you or I?

I say it's time these people get real jobs which actually contribute to society in a positive way.

 

[Lentern]

Political commentators (or those who spend their life predicting political outcomes) are rarely correct and rarely have any credibility. Laurie Oakes, Dennis Shananhan, Paul Bongiorno, Phillip Coorey, Mark Riley et al each fall within this category.

Most of the time it is these individuals who spread rumour and innuendo and breach confidentiality, in turn causing political change (as we have encountered).

Sure, comment on what has happened. But stop trying to be like you can predict the future. It is a futile business. I mean what makes these people any more educated to pass judgement than you or I?

I say it's time these people get real jobs which actually contribute to society in a positive way.

Ever heard of a guy called Peter Brent? He has a pretty good record.

 

[Gerald10]

A study came out last year that compared the predictions of commentators and the average joe and found that there was really very little difference.

 

[Lentern]

A study came out last year that compared the predictions of commentators and the average joe and found that there was really very little difference.

Doesn't surprise me, Peter Hartcher is certainly letting down the team, Annabelle Crabbe isn't earning her wage either. Andrew Bolt is pretty ordinary as well. But Henderson is pretty good, Brent is excellent, Marr seems to guess what will happen pretty well but I often question what he thinks it the cause.