Australian Politics (3 Viewers)

[Iron]

 

[Lentern]

Just like to preface this by saying I started writing this before Iron quoted Keating so it doesn't appear as though its a weird attempt to respond to something he said.

Almost cried watching Brendan on Qanda last night thinking about all that talent ruined by circumstance. Someone from the crowd yelled out "go Brendan" and it reminded me of Maggie Thatchers last question time where she absolutely killed and a tori backbencher shouted "take your resignation back!" What's Brendan going to do outside of politics? He won't be happy. Malcolm will be fine, having fun buying and selling stuff but thats not for Brendan.

 

[spiny norman]

Lentern, in the past two pages you've said some really really dumb things.

Brendan Nelson's a joke. He was William McInnes' punchline for the majority of that Q & A episode. While I prefer his politics to that of Thatcher's, to compare his political talents to hers is fucking ludicrous. His time as Opposition Leader saw no great "talent ruined by circumstance" but rather weakness and party compromising that saw the Liberal Party incredibly divided. His job was to unify the party, not last until the next election, but he could do neither. Maybe he couldn't build himself up, but he could've tried to knock Rudd down, but was unable to do that. He was, in short, a leader of the Coalition in a period of wasted time (this seems a traditional Liberal problem, with only Menzies, Fraser and Howard ever being real leaders of note).

Next, Gillard. Why on earth do you hate her so? Is it that you want to be a contrarian and dislike the most well regarded parliamentary performer going? More likely, do you have a strong dislike of any sign of personality on the part of a parliamentarian, hence your adulation of that blandest of politicians, Stephen Smith? I bet you love The Eagles. Yes, she voted for Latham over Beazley - in a time where Labor needed a big change in fortunes, she took a risk and chose someone who would either win big or lose big, rather than someone guaranteed to lose and who, just a week earlier, had claimed they were more conservative on all issues bar the economy than John Howard. May I remind you that Stephen Smith voted for Beazley over Rudd - I put to you a far far dumber choice than Latham over Beazley.

 

[Lentern]

Lentern, in the past two pages you've said some really really dumb things.

Brendan Nelson's a joke. He was William McInnes' punchline for the majority of that Q & A episode. While I prefer his politics to that of Thatcher's, to compare his political talents to hers is fucking ludicrous. His time as Opposition Leader saw no great "talent ruined by circumstance" but rather weakness and party compromising that saw the Liberal Party incredibly divided. His job was to unify the party, not last until the next election, but he could do neither. Maybe he couldn't build himself up, but he could've tried to knock Rudd down, but was unable to do that. He was, in short, a leader of the Coalition in a period of wasted time (this seems a traditional Liberal problem, with only Menzies, Fraser and Howard ever being real leaders of note).

Next, Gillard. Why on earth do you hate her so? Is it that you want to be a contrarian and dislike the most well regarded parliamentary performer going? More likely, do you have a strong dislike of any sign of personality on the part of a parliamentarian, hence your adulation of that blandest of politicians, Stephen Smith? I bet you love The Eagles. Yes, she voted for Latham over Beazley - in a time where Labor needed a big change in fortunes, she took a risk and chose someone who would either win big or lose big, rather than someone guaranteed to lose and who, just a week earlier, had claimed they were more conservative on all issues bar the economy than John Howard. May I remind you that Stephen Smith voted for Beazley over Rudd - I put to you a far far dumber choice than Latham over Beazley.

If you take a squiz at the history books I think you'll find i the 12 months following a change of government the leader of the opposition allways struggles or atleast according to public opinion. Beazley, Peacock, Whitlam, Snedden, infact Carmen Lawrence is the only leader of the opposition state or federal to actually lead in the opinion polls straight after a change of government. Dr Nelson was allways destined to suffer the same fate only there were at the time four other senior members of his party apparently interested in leading, Turnbull, Abott, Bishop and Costello. (the cult of Hockey came after Bishop imploded).

Nelson was clinical in his performance as leader: stay on message, plug away, present yourself as a nice guy people can relate to, stay positive, take a firm stand here and there, don't make desperate dives to the centre nor listen to the all faithful saying the party can only win government when it presents itself as well right of the incumbent govenrment, convert most policies to platitudes, he did what was needed and had he lead a loyal frontbench(or a scared one in the came of Beazley) he would have made decent inroads into the Rudd governments majority. But there was a more handsome man with a deeper, more commanding voice and atleast equal verbal dexterity to the good doctor who wanted the job. Brendan cant be blamed for the electoral cycles anymore than Kevin can be for the GFC.

As for Howard being "a real leader" I believe gulp says it all. If Simon Crean had come to the leadership in similar circumstances to John Howard II (as opposed to circa 87 where he got thrashed) he could have won. The only leaders of inferior political ability John Howard defeated or worked alongside were Hewson, Downer and Latham. The longevity of Howards government had nothing to do with "conviction", it had to do with 3 events, 9/11, The MV Tampa and the election of Mark Latham to party leader.

I hate Gillard for largely the same reason as I dislike Howard so, she is unworthy of the praise she gets. However impressive she might seem in parliament when it comes to her vote worth she subscribes to the same Latham/Keating nonsense whereby the more offensive and polarising you are towards the opposition the more effective use of your chance at the dispatch box. Atleast with Keating he was actually better at it, but she is just given points for playing the roll of the ball breaking woman. The actual lines she throws about are no better than those of the short, fat, Albanese whom nobody would dare call parliaments second best performer. And unlike Keating who made the brave calls in spite of a delicate portfolio, she has a government flooding education with money and an opposition who had workchoices in government. Hardly alot of pressure to be applied there.

The idea that Beazley would have lost 04 is absurd. But for a short period between around the Tampa Beazley have allways held the edge over Howard ever since the honeymoon period ended in 1997. His small target strategies were highly effective and his rhetoric struck a chord far more so than John Howards could. Had he gotten to fight the election Crean probably could have won it too, (actually if he was dumb enough to vote Latham probably not) the electorate needed a reason not to vote labor at that point and Latham was precisely that.

As for the Rudd/Beazley ballot I think Smith made the safe call. He knew what Beazley had going for him, he knew he had Howard's number, after being around so long it wasn't going to be a huge victory for bomber but it was an assured one. By contrast Rudd was untested as a leader: he might have had a Downeresque meltdown if he got ahead of himself or he might have done something stupid like make Gillard shadow treasurer. Under the circumstances the wise thing would probably have been to vote Beazley, a majority of ten in the house is as good as thirty really.

Spiny just ask yourself, do you think Rudd is a competent politician? If yes, do you think there might be a reason Gillard has not been given one of the sensitive portfolios of Treasury, Finance, Foreign Affairs, Immigration or Defence?

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Lentern, in the past two pages you've said some really really dumb things.

Brendan Nelson's a joke. He was William McInnes' punchline for the majority of that Q & A episode. While I prefer his politics to that of Thatcher's, to compare his political talents to hers is fucking ludicrous. His time as Opposition Leader saw no great "talent ruined by circumstance" but rather weakness and party compromising that saw the Liberal Party incredibly divided. His job was to unify the party, not last until the next election, but he could do neither. Maybe he couldn't build himself up, but he could've tried to knock Rudd down, but was unable to do that. He was, in short, a leader of the Coalition in a period of wasted time (this seems a traditional Liberal problem, with only Menzies, Fraser and Howard ever being real leaders of note).

Next, Gillard. Why on earth do you hate her so? Is it that you want to be a contrarian and dislike the most well regarded parliamentary performer going? More likely, do you have a strong dislike of any sign of personality on the part of a parliamentarian, hence your adulation of that blandest of politicians, Stephen Smith? I bet you love The Eagles. Yes, she voted for Latham over Beazley - in a time where Labor needed a big change in fortunes, she took a risk and chose someone who would either win big or lose big, rather than someone guaranteed to lose and who, just a week earlier, had claimed they were more conservative on all issues bar the economy than John Howard. May I remind you that Stephen Smith voted for Beazley over Rudd - I put to you a far far dumber choice than Latham over Beazley.

Hey, good post, but don't diss The Eagles man.

 

[Rafy]

Rees losing grip on power

Barry with a large lead on the PP figure (50-33). Unfortunately no primary voting intention numbers. (2PP is rather meaningless under OPV with a large 3rd party vote). Issues polling all bad news for Labor.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

The Canadian GDP is expected to grow -7.0% in the first quarter. American GDP grew -5.7% Q1. Mexican GDP growth is expected to have been -8.5% in the 1st quarter. Japan's GDP grew -4.0% in Q1. Germany's GDP grew -6.9% in Q1. Britain's GDP grew -1.9% in Q1.

Australian GDP growth is expected to be -0.2% in the 1st quarter.

Can I get a 'lol'?

 

[Lentern]

Rees losing grip on power

Barry with a large lead on the PP figure (50-33). Unfortunately no primary voting intention numbers. (2PP is rather meaningless under OPV with a large 3rd party vote). Issues polling all bad news for Labor.

If this government leaves office at the enxt election it will be the longest serving government since Queensland Country Nationals (which dominated three decades). Surely you can't ignoe the link between the age of the government and its unpopularity, compared to say Mike Rann's SA.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Rees losing grip on power

Barry with a large lead on the PP figure (50-33). Unfortunately no primary voting intention numbers. (2PP is rather meaningless under OPV with a large 3rd party vote). Issues polling all bad news for Labor.

No primary vote figures (Greens voters are key - would they support Liberal or Labour?) and the sample size was a flimsy 500 people.

 

[Rafy]

Yeh saw the hard copy of the herald. All these numbers, but no primary! Really shits me.

 

[Iron]

lol hockey bear

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Kevin Rudd was just thrown a massive bone that is sure to irk Turnbull: The economy grew 0.4% in the first quarter of this year, defying economist forecasts of -0.2%, meaning no declaration of 'technical recession' is possible, meaning no newspaper field day, no Liberal claims of "the stimulus package failed", and that Rudd can say to the Australian people "My stimulus package is working."

I imagine you'll see a halt to Rudd's slow fall in the polls.

 

[Lentern]

Kevin Rudd was just thrown a massive bone that is sure to irk Turnbull: The economy grew 0.4% in the first quarter of this year, defying economist forecasts of -0.2%, meaning no declaration of 'technical recession' is possible, meaning no newspaper field day, no Liberal claims of "the stimulus package failed", and that Rudd can say to the Australian people "My stimulus package is working."

I imagine you'll see a halt to Rudd's slow fall in the polls.

How on earth did that happen? Didn't we get figures not long ago sayign unemployment had fallen as well? Falling unemployment, trade surplus and economic growth, low interest rates, how in God's name is that even possible? If you ignore debt you'd say the economy looked in god shape.

And your right its a pretty damning thing for Turnbull, also very damaging to Hockey as well. Gareth Evans spoke about "the aura of death" when Hawke began to lose it aganist Hewson, I just sense a certain something about Turnbulls demeanour watching him in parliament now, its not a good whatever it is.

Also quite funny is that Costello isn't really linked to the oppositions voting against the stimulus and budget, he didn't turn up for any of the votes.

 

[Brontecat]

wait til we see the fallout from the first home buyers grants
- ppl are still losing theire jobs
- are buying houses beyond there means
- and have had their faith re-affirmed in the economy and likely to 'loosen their belts' a bit so to speak resulting in greater personal debt

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

wait til we see the fallout from the first home buyers grants
- ppl are still losing theire jobs
- are buying houses beyond there means
- and have had their faith re-affirmed in the economy and likely to 'loosen their belts' a bit so to speak resulting in greater personal debt

Grasping at straws.

 

[Rafy]

Fitzgibbon resigns as Defence Minister | The Australian

JOEL Fitzgibbon has resigned as Defence Minister over a series of meetings involving his brother Mark, the head of health insurance company NIB, US health giant Humana, and the Government.

In a letter to Kevin Rudd, Mr Fitzgibbon said he could not be "satisfied" that he had "entirely conformed with your Ministerial Code of Conduct".

At a press conference in Canberra, the Prime Minister said Mr Fitzgibbon had been “a first-class defence minister”.

Mr Rudd said the decision to resign had been Mr Fitzgibbon’s.

“As I have made clear to my ministers over a long period of time, the Government expects high standards of accountability on the part of its Ministers,” Mr Rudd said.

“All my ministers are familiar with that, and from that basis the minister has extended his resignation today and I have accepted it.

“On the question of a replacement Minister for Defence, we will make a statement on that very soon.”

 

[Iron]

yeah huge waste

Saw Warren taking defence qs and was like waaa then they cut to Fitz nodding on the back bench and i was like waaawaaa

 

[Lentern]

Fitzgibbon resigns as Defence Minister | The Australian

Once a lemming allways a lemming. His closeness to Latham should have been a warning from a mile off, lucky for the government it all came undone now insteadof in three years time.

Assuming nobody of senior rank will get a demoted to defence and that Rudd will pick a man(have we ever had a woman?) and its not really Garretts thing I suspect the main candidates will be Albanese, Carr, McClelland, Ferguson or Snowdon. I think probably McClelland(sadly) Debus or Griffith could then move into cabinet and Clare or Shorten could get an outer ministry position(According to Gerrard the right wing of the party desperately wants Shorten and Clare to be in cabinet before too long).

 

[spiny norman]

Once a lemming allways a lemming. His closeness to Latham should have been a warning from a mile off, lucky for the government it all came undone now insteadof in three years time.

Jesus Christ, your "those who did the same as Smith = good, those who went with Latham = bad" mindset is really fucking annoying. It was over five years ago, move on already.

Assuming nobody of senior rank will get a demoted to defence and that Rudd will pick a man(have we ever had a woman?) and its not really Garretts thing I suspect the main candidates will be Albanese, Carr, McClelland, Ferguson or Snowdon. I think probably McClelland(sadly) Debus or Griffith could then move into cabinet and Clare or Shorten could get an outer ministry position(According to Gerrard the right wing of the party desperately wants Shorten and Clare to be in cabinet before too long).

All the media says expect Combet to get it, or at least get moved into the Ministry with Evans or Faulkner getting it. Long shots are that Arbib or Shorten get in. Combet would be a very interesting development though, as it would see a Right cabinet minister be replaced by a Left one - doing so would see the Left actually have more members in the cabinet than the Right. While I'd prefer to see Combet get Industrial Relations (kind of his area of expertise), he was Parliamentary Secretary for Defence, and is probably the most well-respected backbencher Rudd has, so think it'd be a pretty good move.

 

[Lentern]

Jesus Christ, your "those who did the same as Smith = good, those who went with Latham = bad" mindset is really fucking annoying. It was over five years ago, move on already.



All the media says expect Combet to get it, or at least get moved into the Ministry with Evans or Faulkner getting it. Long shots are that Arbib or Shorten get in. Combet would be a very interesting development though, as it would see a Right cabinet minister be replaced by a Left one - doing so would see the Left actually have more members in the cabinet than the Right. While I'd prefer to see Combet get Industrial Relations (kind of his area of expertise), he was Parliamentary Secretary for Defence, and is probably the most well-respected backbencher Rudd has, so think it'd be a pretty good move.

Those who voted for Latham didn't merely turn up to the vote one day and decide in a moment of madness that Latham was a good idea. They undermined to no end one of the most talented politicians of the generation in Beazley. They drove a stupid, polarising agenda, they could later be found begging Latham jr(Gillard) to run for the leadership after the lad wrote his diaries and the moment Beazley returned to the leadership most of them began working swiftly to destablise him.

Not every Lemming is an imbecile, Crean was probably just too bitter towards Beazley to support him which was understandable but the blokes behaviour as leader, shadow treasurer and trade minister rings of a man with reasonably keen instincts. Likewise Penny Wong was probably just a bit opportunistic in voting for Latham and missjudged how he would behave(as opposed to how he'd be recieved which was the mistake of most lemmings). But Carr, L Ferguson, Sawford, Gillard and Fitzgibbon were true believers in Latham.They actually believe in that style of campaigning, they probably still think Gillard would have won a bigger majority then Rudd. Aside from Gillard who holds her own because she's articulate and attractive the rest are liabilities and should mercifully be deselected.

As for the cabinet position to give it to Combet would be very foolish. Although not as foolish as making him an IR minister. Faulkner is too "noble" he'd be a pest in defence, Evans would be good I forgot about him. Shorten is too junior, it'd be a huge jump, likewise Arbib. Also be weary of just dividing the ALP into its official factions. Like I mentioned Fitzgibbon is closer to the Gillard-Carr-Ferguson gang than he is to Swan-Smith-Conroy. Likewise Tanner although spruiking fairly left agena himself seems to do so through right wing members more so than the left.

Of course if it were me I'd have Bob Mcmullan rushed into cabinet, but then again I'd have him as a senior cabinet minister anyway.