I see it differently. If indeed the shift in polling is due to men changing votes it shows just how sexist this country is a d completely vindicates Gillard.Gillard cynically used gender for her own political advantage and it blew up in her face. It's satisfying such divisive politics have been so thoroughly rejected.
Great work McTernan.
Wrong again m8I was thinking the same thing Rafy. Gillard is so incompetent she never should have been supported by her party in the first place. I'd even go as far as to say she is more incompetent as a leader than Mark Latham was.
It is possible, although what did she expect. If Abbott comes put this week and says all women belong in the kitchen then I would also expect to see support for him from women drop.I see it differently. If indeed the shift in polling is due to men changing votes it shows just how sexist this country is a d completely vindicates Gillard.
If you think I am wrong then it confirms in my mind that I am correct. No offense intended townie although your advice/opinions are shit.Wrong again m8
How is she trying to get the low earners vote in recent times? She has been putting them off side instead by cutting welfare.well come on, you've got to admit it is at least slightly amusing - i mean yes, in abbott's private world it's clear he holds mens' position in society above womens', but to present the labour party as a bastion of hope for women and the liberal party as a bunch of sexist guys from the 1900s is just ridiculous. as much as i personally don't like the funding of it, the liberals policies are actually MORE generous to women (in terms of maternity leave) than labour. i think she thought she could pull off another misogynist monologue and didn't think it through.
she's trying really hard to get a certain group to rally behind labour, a couple months ago it was low income earners and now its women, but she seems to polarize the other side of the spectrum in attempting to do so.
you're kidding right?I see it differently. If indeed the shift in polling is due to men changing votes it shows just how sexist this country is a d completely vindicates Gillard.
believe it was to do with super contributions which liberals will be taxing for low income earners, education grants (targets public schools) and pushing hard that the liberals would probably introduce a hike on the gst if they were going to remove other sources of revenue like the carbon/mining tax. gst hits those who spend a larger portion of their income harder (the poor). there was also that speech she gave at the AWU a couple months back which almost sounded like a call to mobilize the unions.How is she trying to get the low earners vote in recent times? She has been putting them off side instead by cutting welfare.
Pretty much correct. When she emerged as PM three years ago I said she was a polarizing politician. Ideologically she's closer to the middle than Rudd or Beazley but her hamfisted style of politics means she polarizes the field and sends moderate voters scurrying off to the coalition. She's never really gotten that sometimes less is more.well come on, you've got to admit it is at least slightly amusing - i mean yes, in abbott's private world it's clear he holds mens' position in society above womens', but to present the labour party as a bastion of hope for women and the liberal party as a bunch of sexist guys from the 1900s is just ridiculous. as much as i personally don't like the funding of it, the liberals policies are actually MORE generous to women (in terms of maternity leave) than labour. i think she thought she could pull off another misogynist monologue and didn't think it through.
she's trying really hard to get a certain group to rally behind labour, a couple months ago it was low income earners and now its women, but she seems to polarize the other side of the spectrum in attempting to do so.
Based on this it hasn't really been entirely rejected though because women actually polled higher after it. There seems to be a net loss because more men were upset by it than women being empowered by it.Gillard cynically used gender for her own political advantage and it blew up in her face. It's satisfying such divisive politics have been so thoroughly rejected.
Great work McTernan.
This is a much more articulate way of saying what I was driving at.Based on this it hasn't really been entirely rejected though because women actually polled higher after it. There seems to be a net loss because more men were upset by it than women being empowered by it.
only the internet and american media really did the "you go girl!" praise on the misogyny speech. i just found it ironic that a member of her party was known to use union credit cards to go to brothel and she didnt give him shit for it.Movement statistically insignificant. Females have displayed at best complete indifference. They did not buy into what the PM was trying to do.
She tried to recapture the moment of that misogyny speech and failed.
It's completely predictable. I was thinking before this poll result, the whole basis of Howards politic was that he made people feel good about themselves. He was extremely anti-white guilt, any kind of guilt he wouldn't have a bar of it. His discourse was for middle Australia to be proud, of everything. People loved that he wouldn't say sorry and didn't give a shit. Gillard has done the anti-Howard. You can't criticise Australian culture or history if you're the prime minister or you're fucked.Movement statistically insignificant. Females have displayed at best complete indifference. They did not buy into what the PM was trying to do.
She tried to recapture the moment of that misogyny speech and failed.