Oz Election Thread #4 - Gillard's Labor

Head of the ETU came out on ABC24 in support of a Bill Shorten challenge, on the grounds of no history (uh, I think Bill was one of the faceless men that deposed Rudd).

Anyway Mrs Hinge says that if it isn't Julia or Kevin after the spill it won't be someone of high merit - she thinks Libs will win next election, implode under Tony, and then Shorten will lead the ALP back to power.

Why does Australian politics seem like a spectator sport?

Am worried that the Rudd family takes the supportive cooing of its acquaintances as a scientific sample of public opinion.

I predicted pretty much the same re Bill Shorten quite a few pages back in this thread.
A pretty obvious (though not too experienced in parliament) "compromise" beneficiary of the current troubles.
And yes, his connections to the "faceless" NSW Right in 2010 are certainly a worry. Whether the mud continues to stick, or not, could be pretty important in his chances. Whether he clearly distances himself from the NSW Right from here on, too.

I can't say (at this point in time) whether I agree or not with Mrs hinge's predictions of a Lib victory at the next election. A heck of a lot depends on what happens in the next 17 or so months.

IF Labor can (or is allowed to) settle down (finally!) following Rudd's destructive shenanigans, we might actually get some real scrutiny of Abbott's policies in the media. And what those policies actually mean (financially) for those Australians already battling to keep their heads above water. We already know that 12000 federal public service jobs (at least) are to go under the Libs ..... let's find out about the rest of their agenda before the next election!
Though I think what the Libs are angling for (still) is an early election .... less Labor policy to have to undo if that occurs. Less time for details of their policies to be too closely scrutinized. Much easier for them, obviously
Anyway, we shall see what we shall see.
-

I'll have my two bob's worth msolga. I watched Kevin Rudd's performance this afternoon and I must say there isn't a Politician, Labour or Liberal, who can come within a mile of this Statesman. No wonder he is the people's choice in the polls, over 80% prefer him as Prime Minister! Labour will do themselves a great disservice if they discard him next Monday. Under Ms Gillard, Labor is doomed as she hasn't got the trust of the Australian people after lying and backstabbing Mr. Rudd. Remember Mr. Rudd was elected by the Australian people, Ms. Gillard wasn't.

I respectfully disagree Dutchy - I think Kevin is all about Kevin. He folded on the mining supertax and he folded on carbon price. He is certainly artful, but what does he really stand for?

I was out of the country when Kevin was disposed so I concede I don't have all the dirty details but on the lying and backstabbing charge I'd say Kevin has more than made up for it - he was sabotaging labor leading into the 2010 election, leaking like a sieve. He's continued and all of Labor's woes from minority government to leadership instability stem from it.

You might think a good performance on TV makes a good prime minister. I think having a talented team of ministers who you can get the best out of and work with is much more important. It worries me that unelected sectional interests are controlling the public debate.

I repeat my question - if Rudd wins the leadership what will the front bench look like? No Wong, no Burke, no Swan, no Roxon, no Plibersek, no Shorten, no Combet, no O'Connor. Won't it be good to have the honourable member for Coorangamite as treasurer?

I wish I had Olgs confidence that people would even consider the policy differences between the two parties - but the electorate is so dumbed down it's following politics like it's reality TV 'aww this poor bugger was really dumped on, I hope he get his revenge, and the bullies get their comeuppance' . It makes me sad.

PS - only the people of his electorate voted for Kevin Rudd - this isn't the US and the Prime Minister isn't the President. Australians don't pick prime ministers they pick local members. Local members pick prime ministers.

Of course you are perfectly entitled to your two bob's worth, Dutchy ....
But I totally disagree with you.
Sorry, but I sincerely do.

I don't think he's behaving like a "statesman" at all.
I think he's behaving as a complete & utter (& somewhat desperate) opportunist in this "contest". He is also not exactly being honest about what "Team Rudd" has been up to for months. That is, undermining this government entirely for his benefit.
I think he is attempting to turn the very serious issue of the leadership of this government into some sort of popularity contest. "People power"?
The trouble is: The "happy little Vegemite" Rudd the public sees in his chirpy PR releases is exactly the opposite of what his fellow ALP parliamentarians had to work with as their leader. His government became dysfunctional under his leadership.

Let me make myself really clear. I have never been an ardent "fan" of either Gillard or Rudd. I haven't voted for either of them. I have voted for the Greens for years now (extremely reluctantly at first) because .... simply because I prefer the Greens' policies. The sorts of policies Labor used to champion.

However, I do recognize that, of the two major Oz political parties, a Labor government is a far better option for ordinary Australians compared to the Liberal alternative. Absolutely. And right now the current Labor government is in strife.
I can't support some popularity contest winner PM who can't lead a functional government. The more I hear of his public pronouncements the more I can see why his government was dysfunctional.
So I'm supporting the Gillard alternative. She at least has gotten things done. In the very difficult circumstances of minority government.

-

If, like me, you've been trying to figure out "the numbers" on both sides of this leadership contest, here's a list published by the AGE today.

This may or may not be 100% accurate. Who can say for sure? :

Gillard v Rudd: the numbers
February 24, 2012 - 2:16PM:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/gillard-v-rudd--the-numbers-20120224-1trud.html

Hi msolga, thank you for your honest reply, I admire the way you put things. Let us agree to peacefully disagree about the leadership issue.

OK!

Hey Dutchy - I just thought I'd let you know that Mrs Hinge thought Kevin's speech was masterfully played (I still haven't seen it). The only flaw was at the end when asked about the leaks. He got angry and went for the journalists, showing just a little bit of the petulance he's renowned for. She thinks he might get in - she agrees that the only common ground the aggrieved parties have is that Tony Abbott should not be prime minister.

Hi hingehead, I agree with Mrs.Hinge, if the Labour caucus takes note of the Australian people's wish, he should be re-elected. I doubt if they have the brains to do that and by blindly following their own egos they will vote themselves out of office come next election. In the meantime Mr. Abbott is laughing in the background abiding his time whilst his opposition self destruct.

I just don't have confidence in the Australian people - most treat this at a visceral level (thus my 'reality tv comment') - and I think 'blindly following their own egos' will lead to a Rudd victory. Thinking about the country and the party will lead to a Gillard victory.

I confess to be at a loss at your blindness to Rudd's ego, but I guess you're at a loss to why I see things the way I do.

C'est la vie.

The thing is, these latest polls reflect the preferences of the Australian people who voted in them, including voters from across the political spectrum.
Those polled do not reflect the wishes of the elected Labor parliamentarians, or even Labor Party members ...... when the real issue is who is to be the leader of the Australian Labor Party.
While many may well prefer Rudd to Gillard as PM, their preferences do not necessarily translate into votes for the Labor Party (led by either Gillard or Rudd) at the next election. And I think it's a mistake to believe they would.
I firmly believe most voters (whether they voted in these polls or not) will continue to vote for the party they've traditionally supported.
If I was polled tomorrow about whether my preference for Liberal Party leader was Abbott or Turnbull, I'd definitely say Turnbull ....... BUT, that does not mean I'd vote for the Libs at the next election. As if!
Same goes for any LNP who were polled yesterday. They will vote LNP, as usual.

All true Olgs. Just listening to Bruce Hawker say that nearly 1 in 2 liberal voters prefer Rudd. Um Brucie - take your spin head off. a) it doesn't mean they'll vote labor and, b) That means just over 1 in 2 would rather he wasn't the leader.

Meaningless commentary for someone deeply entrenched in the Rudd campaign and no-one at the ABC offering any sort of analysis. This country is largely brain dead.