2007 Federal Election - Coalition or Labor/Howard or Rudd? (1 Viewer)

[frog12986]

I can tell you that this business coming under fire will hit Rudd badly in the opinion polls.

I can tell you it won't.

 

[Stott Despoja]

I see no hypocricy in Gillard attacking unfair conditions contained in an AWA. Permentantly and deliberately taking away working conditions is totally different to a simple error which was soon rectified. Howard's comment is making a link that isn't there. His comment seems to suggest that no one should criticise anyone else.

The problem is that the workers at the Motor Inn in question all seemed to be happy with the AWAs. Though it was a simple error, the fact of the matter is that the ALP and the ACTU would have probably jumped all over the issue had it not been so close to home.

Mr Howard isn't asking for the criticism to stop, rather he's asking that the ALP actually take the time to explore such issues before they publicly shame businesses that aren't in the wrong, be it legally or in the eyes of the relevant employees. Though I'm hardly a fan of 'the legislation that must not be named,' I think that Mr Howard's point is fair.

 

[Dr John Hewson]

Labor seems to jump on everything the ABC reports on doesn't it?

 

[frog12986]

Why do people pretend to be 'former politicians' etc..

 

[Sparcod]

Nick Minchin, Stott Despoja, Peter Garrett, John Hewson......have I missed anyone?


Back to the topic of Rein's business and the Motor Inn. I think John Howard's attack backfired a little (by pointing out Rein's business) by making the public become more aware of the cons of Workchoices.

 

[Iron]

Does anyone agree that Rudd was covertly attacking Jannet Howard when he said modern women arent just appendiges of middle-aged men?
A broader sort of young v old thing?

 

[Sparcod]

Does anyone agree that Rudd was covertly attacking Jannet Howard when he said modern women arent just appendiges of middle-aged men?
A broader sort of young v old thing?

Could be?

The way I see things, Kevin Rudd was just saying that women and men CAN go their own ways and yet still be married. Janette is often portrayed as someone who is always by the side of John Howard and she is more than just a 'first lady'. On the other hand, you rarely see Therase with Kevin. I'm not sure what Rudd really meant.

 

[Stott Despoja]

Does anyone agree that Rudd was covertly attacking Jannet Howard when he said modern women arent just appendiges of middle-aged men?
A broader sort of young v old thing?

Though it was clearly an attack on the attitudes of old, I don't think that Mr Rudd was using the moment to attack Mr Howard, covertly or otherwise. That it came across as an attack in the eyes of some (or many) is a shame, but such is life. Despite Mr Howard's reputation, I doubt that he and Mrs Howard are as old-fashioned as many would have us believe. As has been stated elsewhere, Mrs Howard chose to leave the workforce (she was a teacher, I believe) when their children were born. She wasn't forced out in an attempt to reinforce the power of the father in the Howard household.

On that note, it's a shame that a number of stay-at-home mothers were offended by Mr Rudd's comments. He wasn't arguing that women who stay at home are somewhat old-fashioned, but rather he was saying that the women of today, for the most part, have the freedom to chose what it is they will do with their lives. As most here hopefully know, the appendage comment was directed against those who think that the woman must devote all of her time to the children so that the career of the husband may continue without interruption.

 

[premer]

Politicians are experts when it comes to subtlety, and Mr Rudd could be attacking Janet or not, thats not important. The reality is he is right, and as exciting as it was for a politicians to recognise change, thew pitty is it was contradictory to the actions of his wife, of recent.

 

[frog12986]

Coalition faces Doom

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21805416-1702,00.html

It's interesting how Rudd and Co. keep trying to convince the media and the Australian people that it will be a 51-49 result. The most ridiculous thing about that claim, is that presuming a uniform swing, it would only yield 74 seats for Labor which is not enough to form a majority government..

 

[wheredanton]

Coalition faces Doom

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21805416-1702,00.html

The Coalition has nothing to worry about. Polls mean nothing. However, Howard needs to stop getting all flustered about ABC bias and MLoudes daughters on TCN 9. Shutup about those side issues and just bang on about wages growth, low unemployment, low interest rates and, if need be, Islamic immigration.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Individual polls mean nothing. When the results are consistent, surely it begins to mean something (yes, it does).

 

[frog12986]

Wheredanton is just using a touch of reverse psychology. The Newspoll released tonight ALP 60-40 on a TPP basis merely confirms that Rudd will be elected Prime Minister later this year..

The consistency of the polls in unprecedented, and no amount of government effort will claw these types of figures back. I'm definitely glad I made a certain wager at $1.75. It's only going to continue to head south.

 

[jb_nc]

46 seats lol, the coalition will be destroyed.

and if (when?) labor gets into power and somehow (farfetched i know) fucks up the economy, it will spell the death of labor in australia

(oh and tbh ive trolled these forums w/ my partisan hackery but i cbf if rudd gets in and would kinda be a bit glad to see what changes in australia)

 

[withoutaface]

Rudd's no Keating, but he won't utterly destroy the economy.

 

[wheredanton]

Wheredanton is just using a touch of reverse psychology. The Newspoll released tonight ALP 60-40 on a TPP basis merely confirms that Rudd will be elected Prime Minister later this year..

The consistency of the polls in unprecedented, and no amount of government effort will claw these types of figures back. I'm definitely glad I made a certain wager at $1.75. It's only going to continue to head south.

I'm not pulling your leg. I genuinely believe the Libs will get home, with a reduced margin. I think its a tad sad you have given up on your party and I haven't! Have more faith Frog.

As for some earlier comments floating around this thread about How gillard doesn't have children. You know she may not be childless by choice. The thought that she may not be able to have children makes the genuine boofhead Heffernan's comments all the more offensive.

 

[frog12986]

Regardless of history, I believe the electorate has stopped listening to the Coaliton, and of course, that is the key element of electoral failure. No issue can dent Rudd's popularity. Of course anything can happen in the lead up to the election, but Rudd is too smart and composed for that.

 

[frog12986]

This comment makes no sense. How is Rudd so smart that he could prevent something unfortunate happening to his party?

I was referring to something of Latham-esque proportions happening. Rudd is not Latham, and is far too smart to make the same (or similar) mistakes.

 

[Triangulum]

Howard doesn't seem to have been politicking at all well in the last couple of weeks. I mean, the best he could do with Theresegate was 'Yeah, but like ... if it was someone else they'd be complaining'? That's not exactly the sort of argument that cuts through to the electorate.

Rudd's no Keating, but he won't utterly destroy the economy.

Agreed. It's not as if governments make any major decision without having legions of public servants go over the details.

 

[Iron]

Ill be personally interested in what Rudd does with the public service. Howard has ruthlessly castrated it, by linking tenure with performance etc. It's shamefully politicised at the mo. Canberra public servants are haunting creatures indeed.
Id seriously reconsider my career prospects if Labor would restore its frank and fearless integrity.