Liberal is better than Labour (2 Viewers)

[Thomas_wow]

i like mark latham, hes such a legend

"we're gonna fix up all these problems... lower taxes yet at the same time fix all the problems in the country!!!11"

anyone else watch his budget reply? he had all these brilliant plans and policies but not once did he or has he shown how he will do all these things.

labour were doomed as soon as hawk retired... they need a good leader... and that leader needs, A CANOE

 

[cayte]

Well, as I remember it, Paul Keating was actually in office for a term or two... after Hawkey btw. Remember that...?

 

[zahid]

omg....i am not trying to act like a homie....i do not want to be one...i was just using those terms to reply to one of the posts...seriously u need to stop making assumptions and judgements about people by just looking at thier avater and signiture....I got 2pac on both my av and sig due to the fact that i like some of his music.....DOES THAT MAKE ME A SO- CALLED "HOMIE".....i guess its not really ur fault u hav nothing else to judge me by....oh well....i guess ill change my av and sig.... so that ppl dont make the wrong assumption. Its not ur fault glycerine many other ppl hav made similar comments based on my avater and signiture....Oh well its just meeh i guess...sorii for coming down hard on you...ITS MY FAULT.

 

[CrashOveride]

How do you define which party is "better"?

Ultimately, nothing changes.

 

[Xayma]

Originally posted by Thomas_wow
labour were doomed as soon as hawk retired... they need a good leader... and that leader needs, A CANOE

Retired, since when is getting kicked out by your party while your PM retiring.

 

[eLmo]

Originally posted by zahid
FUCK YOU AND FUCK THIS THREAD

that was your first post... great entrance!... it may not be so uhhh "homie" as you say... but where is the relevance??

 

[um..]

the fact people are ignorant enough to not even know how to spell "labor" would not suggest they are in any position to voice a serious political opinion

and gwb, i think you will find in the last two elections labor have actually recieved more of the primary vote then the liberals - it's only when number of seats won, preferences and the coalition come into play that liberal get the other hand

 

[George W. Bush]

meh, i think that was the GST election only (off the top of my head), but anyway.

That's the system...

If you're really representing 99.5% of the country, you should be able to win a majority of the seats

 

[glycerine]

actually, i said 99.5% of the population who don't earn $250,000+.

that doesn't mean people with lower incomes aren't in the 'rich minority' (for lack of my brain functioning and finding the better term) and more likely to vote liberal purely because their economic policies advantage them

 

[um..]

Originally posted by George W. Bush
meh, i think that was the GST election only (off the top of my head), but anyway.

That's the system...

If you're really representing 99.5% of the country, you should be able to win a majority of the seats

no i'm quite sure it was the last election as well. you know, the one where they deliberately misled the public over the tampa children overboard scandal? sorta like the one where johnny said there would never be a GST, but just a tad more sinister and completely fucked

im sure they wouldnt do that again though, mislead the public for political gain...

 

[George W. Bush]

Originally posted by um..
no i'm quite sure it was the last election as well. you know, the one where they deliberately misled the public over the tampa children overboard scandal? sorta like the one where johnny said there would never be a GST, but just a tad more sinister and completely fucked

im sure they wouldnt do that again though, mislead the public for political gain...

Yeah, because it's not like everyone didn't know before the election that John was going to try and push through the GST

 

[um..]

im referring to when he said it as treasurer

 

[neo o]

Originally posted by George W. Bush
Yeah, because it's not like everyone didn't know before the election that John was going to try and push through the GST

And Georgie is saying it doesn't make a difference either way, because he ran for election with the GST etc.

 

[Enlightened_One]

Why was this in the ancient forum. Ah well, one of life's great mystery's

Traditionally Labour supports the average person, the worker and Liberal supports the rich. However they trip over each other these days in being so similiar in some respects.

With my beliefs I'd be Labour, but I ain't. There is no loner right wing or left wing politics between the major parties, they both same the thing nearly.

Still, I award Latham points because he is starting to realise what his party stands for when he stands up for those earning under 62, 500 a year, the poor.

 

[saladsurgery]

yo

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2004/05/26/pollgraph.jpg

from here.

 

[Enlightened_One]

Yeah, Costello does make Howard look good. It's not really right that Costello may get Prime Minister based on Howard's popularity. He wouldn't get in on his own merit alone.

 

[George W. Bush]

Originally posted by um..
im referring to when he said it as treasurer

Yes, Howard did say there wasn't going to be a GST on his policy agenda. In the 1980s, or something. But before the election, John Howard said that if he won, he was going to push for a GST. Every single voter knew this policy platform. He isn't lying or decieving the people, no-one's going to vote for him based on what he said in the 1980s, assuming that will rule over his current policy objectives. While he is being contradictory, I think everyone has at some time contradicted what they said 10 years ago.


Oh, and I'll say it right now, Costello CAN and WILL win an election as the head of the Liberal party (assuming he doesn't suddenly quit politics or something). You can dig this up in 10 years to make fun of me if I'm wrong.

 

[crazyhomo]

Originally posted by Enlightened_One
Traditionally Labour supports the average person, the worker and Liberal supports the rich. However they trip over each other these days in being so similiar in some respects.

until latham took over it was basically a one-party system. he's done a good job at making labor policies an actual alternative to the liberals

 

[crazyhomo]

Originally posted by George W. Bush
Yes, Howard did say there wasn't going to be a GST on his policy agenda. In the 1980s, or something. But before the election, John Howard said that if he won, he was going to push for a GST. Every single voter knew this policy platform. He isn't lying or decieving the people, no-one's going to vote for him based on what he said in the 1980s, assuming that will rule over his current policy objectives. While he is being contradictory, I think everyone has at some time contradicted what they said 10 years ago.

howard actually said there would be no gst in 1995, a year before the election, and um.. he was opposition leader at the time

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/12/08/1070732146338.html?from=storyrhs

 

[George W. Bush]

I stand corrected.

But anyway, as I was saying, Howard didn't mislead Australia over the GST.