What will sway your vote?

Yup! Like it or lump it there are some whom the public will never trust enough to elect. Big Kim was one, Simon Crean was another and Tony Abbott is also someone who just does not come across as trustworthy. He might be the most honest bloke in Australia but he gives ME the creeps and a lot of people I talk to feel the same way. Not one thing you could put your finger on just yeeeeeech! feeling.

 

The polls and the people were clearly calling for Rudd's reinstatement Slippery. You yourself said (I think), it would have been a shame for the coalition to govern with a massive majority.

Those that felt they couldn't work under him resigned from cabinet or are leaving politics altogether, which is an honourable suggestion for the good of the party. Obviously, those that want to give him a second chance are happy to take the chance. At the end of the day, taking a party to an election knowing you are barely coming out alive is probably considered stupid and suicidal. He is an idiot but that is not the way the people see it, Gillard was a great operator but that is not how the people saw it.

 

Mark Latham, especially after the ''handshake" and definitely beyond!

 

This is not a new bloody tactic. It has been around for YEARS. Ever since mass media and the need to "charismatic" leaders who will appeal to the popular vote there has been leadership spills not in favour of the most capable but in favour of the most popular. I remember a time when we were about to go to an election with Bill Hayden as leader then they elected Bob Hawke because he would win the election for them - and he did.

The national party did it here in Queensland election before last and lost.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_spill

 

TV I do not wish to turn this tribal, that is not what I am putting forward. Both parties are equally at fault of putting their party before the people. Ziggy had replied to a post of mine arguing against this point. His opinion was that the ALP put Rudd in because the people wanted it. In part he is correct. My arguement is that the people were a secondary thought behind the brand. A part of the process of re election. You could say they prostituted their beliefs for the chance of power. Not something owned only by the ALP.

I did say that we need effective opposition, but that has nothing to do with this point.

 

BB the fact that this is not a new thing..... Sorry, a bloody new thing, doesn't make it right. Someone with you political/moral leanings should find unpalatable. Perhaps your political leaning is overshadowing your moral leanings ?

 

I wont be voting for Kevin Rudd's (aka "the sewer rat") party...
If any party states that they will turn the boats back...I will vote for that party....

 

- - - Updated - - -

But turning the boats back may cost us more

 

BB I have no idea what you are on about. Perhaps you should go back and read through the posts so you can grasp the context of the discussion.

 

$4billion a year atm....

 

Well I gather this is going they way most ALP supporters like to go. Lay pretence of real issues and throw about the usual crap.

I thought you wanted to debate policy? But all you want is to pretend. As I follow the thread I see nothing but opinion on the popularity of particular leaders. Is this why Gillard could not get the message across, say you want to discuss the policies and reflect on the politician.

And people wonder why credibility is low...

 

We`re supposed to be choosing the best leaders for our country, NOT our favorite soap opera stars.

 

Then perhaps you should familiarise yourself with the logical fallacy that is a "straw man argument". We went from discussing politics to you assigning me a moral stance which you then claimed I breached.

 

BB I apologise for I feel I may of misconstued your original post. I must admit that I was thrown by your agressive opening line. After re reading that post I could see you were merely pointing out the decades of this tactic, not defending it. I do apologise.

 

Slippery, parties have to do what they have to do! I don't think it's wrong! They have to try and respond to the wants of the people! It's like putting forward a policy and trying to convince the people it is okay! In the instance of Julia, they couldn't get her across the line "unbloody fortunately"! If the people want Rudd and he gets in, we have to hope for the best for the good of our country! If Abbott gets in, I hope he ends up being a productive and visionary PM! At the moment, we can't see that either of them will achieve greatness based on what we have already seen!

Anyway

You are right, those that "changed their vote" could be seen in this light, but just remember some of those that stood their ground (especially in cabinet) are bailing all together or heading back to the back bench. Out of his 57 votes he received he always had around mid to late 30's. Not everyone "prostituted" themselves.....lol!

To hell with it, they're all a bunch of whores!!!!!!

 

Yeh whoring dogs !!!!!

The ALP told us that Kevin 07 was no longer good for the country or the direction the Labor party were heading so he had to go. Now only as far back as a couple of weeks they all vowed their undying devotion and loyalty to Julia. A couple of polls and a tragic photo shoot later and the same party start wriggling and big Jules buoyed by their support calls for a spill to put this to bed once and for all and rid the party of the dirty Rudd. Next thing she finds she has been EUCHRED and is on her way. So within the space of no time the whole party ideals and direction have changed and now the once divisive Rudd is the only thing good for the country and the direction of the Labor party ? Credability ?

Don't get me wrong I think a few more seats in opposition is good for everyone, but it is the deceptive excuses that annoy me. Call it for what it is, " we want to win, we want the power", not " this is good for the party and the country", because they have already told us that he wasn't.

 

I'll be voting for the party that isn't made up of candidates who people from the 1950s would consider Luddites.

 

I'm shocked ! LOL.

 

I'm biased. But that doesn't mean I can't see problems with the Labor Party. For me, apart from the stench emanating from the NSW branch, particularly the right wing of that branch, is nauseating. But also there are the careerists and managerialists and political professionals who slide into safe seats after a working life of doing nothing except play politics who are causing damage to the Labor Party. I read continually how the unions shouldn't have so much influence in the party. No? It's a labour party! It's not for middle class types who can't bring themselves to vote Coalition and think the Greens are too flakey. No doubt in the next election there will be staffers who lob into safe seats - not the marginals of course, save them for the ordinary members who just happen to get the numbers for a pre-selection. And Rudd is going to be a big problem for Labor. Okay he's conned the dopes so far, but if he gets into office again as PM he will be unbearable. Labor needs a term in opposition so it can clean out its messy corners and start doing what it should be standing for.

 

Common slippery, you don't go in it to lose, that's ludicrous! The only team that I know of where people go in it to lose is the NSW blues! Poor guys have used up all their contingencies! Look, despite the stigma associated with politicians the underlying issues from both sides is their belief in their ideals! One side believes in providing circumstances for all to have opportunity to be productive and the other side at the moment doesn't know what they believe at the moment because their leader hasn't outlined anything of substance.....lol!!!! Okay, I'm being a tiny bit facetious with the last point!

 

Right then, let's form the Australian Political Forum Party, that should be good for a few internal blues! Just kidding....

 

Just a tad TV. lol.

The truth is I don't believe either side really know what they believe in. It can change at a whim. I am starting to believe that they have no ideals. If they do they really need to revisit them and fast, as the people are growing tired of the constant back biting and facades.

TV the OP asks who you will be voting for. This would be the first time that I could honestly say, " I have no idea", because I have NO IDEA what either stand for or their plans for the future. O one hand we have a party trying to resurrect itself internally while trying to fashion some sort of credibility with the electorate. Then you have the other mob who quite frankly have not released any substance to the policies they have released and that isn't many.

I don't believe either deserve to govern the people of Australia.

- - - Updated - - -

We would have a leadership spill every day !

 

My PF team:

Diuretic would make a good deputy in the cast of albanese; Slippery, you would be good in foreign affairs, not sure how you like being compared with old Bob! Garry reminds me of Christopher pyne, so reckon I'd make him leader of the house(probably the first one to stab me in the back.....lol!) Ziggy treasurer/climate change....seems to know what he's talking about on both issues(can't be too confident in your ability Ziggy lol) BB, seems to fit the profile of Penny Wong....great at head kicking in a controlled subtle manner! Panzer has to be the minister of defence: Aussie, you're a little too right, and due to lack of substance can't find a place for you in my cabinet..hahaha! Garry beat you by a whisker!

 

Good Fun TV.

I would have to work on my ' just out of the coffin look '. Lose about half my weight and work on my mortician type delivery of speech. Other than that .........

 

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, you`ve woken up to the ALP, & the greens, I see.