Re: Aus Federal Politics thread (III)

[Big Dog]

Ah - those numbers were for the state govt were they?

The latest poll in Tassie has seen Labor sink to just 16% of the primary vote

Yes

[JGK]

Well those are pretty sh!t numbers.

[lardbucket]

Sheesh ... Richo utterly blumpied Julia today ...

'She can't offer any leadership at all' 'She's done nothing right in the last 12 months'

and this from a Labor powerbroker

[Paul Keating]

technically speaking Trev ...we did elect them ...we just didnt realise we were

****not for lefty pinko eyes****

Spoiler:

Well if you're counting actual votes, the Libs got more than Labor. But thanks to the preferential system, it was left to three country bumpkins and the Greens to hold the two major parties to ransom whilst we could only watch on.

I think MB already pointed it out

But technically the Libs did not get more primary votes than Labor.

In terms of primary votes the ALP actually had about one million more votes than the Libs.

Of course the Libs are part of a coalition which dwarfed the ALP's primary vote.

[bodyline]

ROFLMAO!



PRIME Minister Julia Gillard has dismissed reports of disquiet in the Labor Party about her leadership, saying she is the best person for the job.
"I'm not going anywhere," she told ABC Radio this morning.

Ms Gillard said she brought to the top job a strong vision for Australia's future.

"A driving sense of purpose to make sure we are a country that spreads opportunity for all," she said.

But senior Government figures say Ms Gillard has "lost her authority" and have urged her to weigh up whether it's in Labor's best interests for her to stay on as PM.

In an extraordinary turn of events, Labor figures who backed Ms Gillard when she replaced Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister just 14 months ago are now floating a plan that could see Mr Rudd return to the leadership, with Stephen Smith as his deputy and Treasurer.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.
Related Coverage.The Punch: Should Gillard go? ..End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.
..
"This is about authority and whether she can assert her authority, because she hasn't got it now," one senior figure said yesterday.


All the Labor figures talking about leadership options insist they do not want another coup against a leader.

They say Ms Gillard would have to voluntarily decide to give up the leadership.

Others in the party say Mr Smith, the Defence Minister, would have the numbers in any ballot and Climate Change Minister Greg Combet could emerge as deputy.

Some say former leader Simon Crean should be given a senior post to win-back support from the business community.

It has exposed a split at the senior levels of the Government as there remains a big chunk of support for Ms Gillard and other senior figures say it would be madness to change leader under any circumstances.

But another senior figure said the interests of the ALP and keeping Tony Abbott out of power must come first.

Set aside hatred

"We need to do what is best for the party and that would be Kevin as leader and Stephen as treasurer," he said.

"There are serious question marks about her continuing. She has to do what is in the best interests of the party. Everyone needs to set aside their hatred of each other.

"She should be given all the time she needs but if she doesn't pick up then we have to change."

With Labor's primary vote at record lows in opinion polls and well below the level when Mr Rudd was removed the ALP is bracing for even lower figures in next round of polls due at the weekend after the High Court sank the Malaysia asylum seeker deal.

One insider suggested the time to have a serious look at the leadership was "late this year or early next year".

"Does she think she can recover as distinct from just toughing it out? If you've got the best interests of the party at heart, it is time to be thinking about it. Was yesterday (the High Court decision) a tipping point - I don't know," he said.

Backbench revolt

Ms Gillard yesterday said the High Court had missed an opportunity to stop people smugglers.

The PM twice accused Chief Justice Robert French of inconsistency, saying he "considered comparable legal questions when he was a judge of the Federal Court and made different decisions to the one that the High Court made".

Last night Ms Gillard vowed to stare down the backbench revolt.

"The Labor team supports me as the best person to do this job as Prime Minister," she said.

"Of course there will always be discussions within political parties ... Obviously that's the right place to do it, in the party room."



Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/gillard-faces-revolt/story-e6frfkvr-1226127713316#ixzz1WkdfcIfb

[skully]

So she's gonna use the Vulture stare on the unhappy Labor backbenches. They must be sh!tting bricks.

[bodyline]

So she's gonna use the Vulture stare on the unhappy Labor backbenches. They must be sh!tting bricks.

Or the Kath

Look at moeeee! Look at moeeee!

[embee]

How about they just get on with running the country properly until the next election

They'd need "permission" from the independents to remove Julia (in any manner) or risk them withdrawing support ...and all the "unpopular" legislation that Julia is trying to put through is supported by the Indies (Carbon Tax , Pokies etc) ...so it's not as if a new PM can change all that

[skully]

Aye, A, but they simply seem incapable.

Apparently the Vulture stare worked on Krudd.

[horace]

Gillard is truly loathesome....she will never go quietly for the good of the country let alone her party....like ljh she suffers from monumental hubris

[skully]

Except LJH had talent. The Vulture has none.

[horace]

Except LJH had talent. The Vulture has none.

oh - didn't know ljh had a talent - juggling?...not sure being able to tell bare faced lies without sniggering counts as a talent

[Bradman]

How about they just get on with running the country properly until the next election

They'd need "permission" from the independents to remove Julia (in any manner) or risk them withdrawing support ...and all the "unpopular" legislation that Julia is trying to put through is supported by the Indies (Carbon Tax , Pokies etc) ...so it's not as if a new PM can change all that

Oh I don't know. The Indies will jump into bed for the next leader for the sake of the unpopular legislation whilst the Oaksh!t and Windsor will purely for survival. Why would they shift support to the coalition when the first thing MM will do is call an election which will see them out of jobs, let alone influence.

[bodyline]

Except LJH had talent. The Vulture has none.

oh - didn't know ljh had a talent - juggling?...not sure being able to tell bare faced lies without sniggering counts as a talent

Name me me a politician who hasn't lied - FFS it's an essential requirement of the job.

[embee]

Dumping Gillard means they can dump the unpopular legislation (because thats the reason for her unpopularity) so the Indies will just withdraw support (Wilkie especially as he's a political gucktard) ...

[embee]

Should Gillard go?

by
David Penberthy

02 Sep

06:00am
Should Julia Gillard just cut her losses and quit? Or should Caucus make the decision for her and just put her out of her misery?



With the High Court striking down the Malaysian solution on asylum seekers as an unconstitutional non-solution, the perception that the Gillard Government is listless and unable to deliver has never been more pronounced.

Some of the names being bandied about to step in save the party from electoral Armageddon now border on the absurd. There has been speculation for months about a leadership change involving everyone from Stephen Smith and Bill Shorten to Greg Combet and Simon Crean, all of which make a kind of sense on paper.

Kevin Rudd has obviously been touted too even though he’s probably the only person who would support his candidacy.

Things have now gone so bananas that even a former premier who has been out of politics for years and is firmly entrenched in the private sector, Queensland’s Peter Beattie, is being touted as a possible candidate. Maybe John Curtin or Ben Chifley could throw their hats in the ring too.

There is no way Julia Gillard will resign. There is probably no way that Caucus will force her aside. The idea of dumping Gillard to save Labor from electoral disaster has at its centre a major flaw – namely that her removal would instantly precipitate a general election which the party would lose in a landslide anyway.

The deal which the independents Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott and Andrew Wilkie made to form government was not a deal with the ALP, but a deal with Julia Gillard. As Rob Oakeshott has said, his handshake was with her. It is more than likely that in the event of Gillard’s removal, one or all three of these men would withdraw their support for the Government and force a snap poll.

As an aside, it seems crazy that through their actions some of these independents continue to act in a manner which is only making the Government less popular. The proposal from Rob Oakeshott for a congestion tax to be examined at Treasurer Wayne Swan’s tax summit is an act of madness at a time when the Government is already struggling to sell an unpopular carbon tax.

Many voters clearly think that it’s time for Julia Gillard to go, and be replaced with another Labor leader, or for the Government itself to go to an election. Several polls have now shown that Kevin Rudd is a more popular choice with voters to lead the ALP.

In a national poll published across News Limited websites yesterday, readers were quick to hit the “yes” button when asked whether Gillard should resign. Within the first hour of polling almost 3000 votes were cast, with 93 per cent saying yes and just 7 per cent saying no. Obviously, the people who are most likely to vote are the people who do not like the PM, but the numbers still make for pretty grim reading.

The reality however is that if Labor were to move against Gillard there is every chance its numbers won’t shift and could possibly get worse. This is because the party, as a brand, to borrow from the lexicon of modern marketing, has now damaged itself in several states by making politically expedient leadership changes which leave the voters feeling dudded and disenfranchised.

There have only been two successful mid-term leadership transitions in the past decade – Bob Carr to Morris Iemma in NSW and Peter Beattie to Anna Bligh in Queensland. Both Iemma and Bligh were able to secure improbable victories, albeit victories which said more about the uselessness of the oppositions than the strength of their governments.

In every other instance the leadership changes have been a disaster and have cemented the perception that faceless factional heavies have usurped the role of the voters in hiring and firing political leaders.

In NSW the transition from Morris Iemma to Nathan Rees to Kristina Keneally was an absurd bit of deckchair-shuffling which laid the foundations for last year’s second-worst ever performance by NSW Labor at a state election. The shift from Steve Bracks to John Brumby ended in tears. In South Australia right now there is the absurd situation of Mike Rann insisting on an extended lap of honour while he leads Jay Weatherill up and down King William Street wearing a pair of L-plates. And volumes have been written about the shift from Rudd to Gillard last year.

Labor has done this so often in the past few years that it cannot afford to do so again. A leadership change would suggest that the party is less worried about delivering good government than simply remaining in government.

The only hope Julia Gillard has is that she can somehow tap into her former political self, when she was the highly rated and highly regarded deputy to Kevin Rudd, kicking goals in the education portfolio, holding a commanding presence in the media as the best communicator of the government line. Her inability to get a message out and to promote the government’s achievements or explain and defend its shortcomings is being lost, not just because so many voters are hostile towards her, but more alarmingly because so many of them have stopped listening to her at all.

Waking up that 20 per cent or 30 per cent of Australians and getting them to engage and reconsider their vote is the greatest challenge she faces and if she can pull that off it will be the greatest political miracle Australia has ever seen. The only thing we can be pretty sure of is that this challenge will still fall to her, not to another leader, unless of course the Labor Party has completely lost the plot.

penberthyd@thepunch.com.au
Not afraid to call a spade a useless bloody shovel: Penbo's other stuff

[Bradman]

Dumping Gillard means they can dump the unpopular legislation (because thats the reason for her unpopularity) so the Indies will just withdraw support (Wilkie especially as he's a political gucktard) ...

You're right about the means for dumping legislation, but unless any of the Indies have got more principles than thus far shown they won't be jumping ship. Even if any of them did, particularly O&S, it won't stop their electorates forgiving them for the original support come the immediate election.

[embee]

Oakeshott's a goner next election whatever happens

I thought I heard Windsor is retiring at the next election (or maybe he's changed his mind) but I doubt he would survive

Wilkie has "principles" which would see him do the "right thing" in his mind even if it cost him an election and Gillard government

The best course for Labor is to push ahead , get their legislation in place and up and running and hope the sky hasnt fallen in before the next election

Once the Carbon Tax and the MRRT are in place they won't be repealable despite all Abbott's bluster and the Libs will have to come up with a credible way to work them (or change them) and save face

[JGK]

The best course for Labor is to push ahead , get their legislation in place and up and running and hope the sky hasnt fallen in before the next election

Agree with this.

[skully]

Oakeshott's a goner next election whatever happens

I thought I heard Windsor is retiring at the next election (or maybe he's changed his mind) but I doubt he would survive

Wilkie has "principles" which would see him do the "right thing" in his mind even if it cost him an election and Gillard government

Oakeshott is as mad as a cut snake. These Independents have lived in the rarified air of Canberra and never really had to do anything in their political lives. But give 'em a sniff of power and they become crazed ego maniacs.

And that qunt Brown just needs a good stabbin', with a real knife.

[horace]

from an interesting article by Norman Abjorenson

"Opinion surveys dating back to 1969 have asked whether people in government can be trusted. The period between 1969 and 1979, embracing the dramatic 1975 dismissal of the Whitlam government, registered the largest decline in trust. In 1969, 51 per cent of respondents believed that people in government could be trusted – the only time a majority has held that view. A decade later, that figure had plunged to just 29 per cent. Trust in government gradually recovered over the course of the Hawke–Keating era to 1996, only to decline again in 1996 (when John Howard was elected prime minister) and only recover in 2007 (when Kevin Rudd took his place). McAllister finds this pattern consistent with citizens evaluating the performances of parties and leaders as much as the institutions they occupy. There is a suggestion here, which is not pursued, that the voter believes Labor adheres to the rules more than the Coalition does."

McAlllister has just published a book -
The Australian Voter: 50 Years of Change
By Ian McAllister
UNSW Press | $49.95

[Bradman]

The best course for Labor is to push ahead , get their legislation in place and up and running and hope the sky hasnt fallen in before the next election

Agree with this.

Seconded. Though they could still dump her and keep the legislation with a shrug and a "We're stuck with it but our main focus is to provide a stable investment environment, which another backflip would not help. But hey we ditched the witch like you asked."

Ludicrous in any normal political environment but nowadays.........?

[Bradman]

from an interesting article by Norman Abjorenson

"Opinion surveys dating back to 1969 have asked whether people in government can be trusted. The period between 1969 and 1979, embracing the dramatic 1975 dismissal of the Whitlam government, registered the largest decline in trust. In 1969, 51 per cent of respondents believed that people in government could be trusted – the only time a majority has held that view. A decade later, that figure had plunged to just 29 per cent. Trust in government gradually recovered over the course of the Hawke–Keating era to 1996, only to decline again in 1996 (when John Howard was elected prime minister) and only recover in 2007 (when Kevin Rudd took his place). McAllister finds this pattern consistent with citizens evaluating the performances of parties and leaders as much as the institutions they occupy. There is a suggestion here, which is not pursued, that the voter believes Labor adheres to the rules more than the Coalition does."

McAlllister has just published a book -
The Australian Voter: 50 Years of Change
By Ian McAllister
UNSW Press | $49.95

Be interesting to see the figures encompassing the last year.

[Big Dog]

How about they just get on with running the country properly until the next election

They tried...result....fail

[skully]

You reckon they even tried?? Looks like they are just marking time to get their Super packages up. Shamateurs.

[Sponsored content]