104 replies to this topic

[Mike]

Aussies! Is Rudd actually going for it?

[jamon g]

nah no way. he's just laughing being a destabilising influence. She might get kicked out before the election, but he won't step in because whoever does is going to get trounced anyway. best bet to wait til after and offer his services again.

[Mike]

Looks like Kevin Rudd's bored of being Foreign Secretary ... And look, the Kevin Rudd MP Twitter account has started following a brand new Kevin Rudd PM Twitter account and vice versa.

Clues, I'm sure there are clues here somewhere, if I could only see them...

I love Australian politics. Internecine Shakesperean warfare.

[garjones]

Maybe he and Gillard have a secret agreement between them to job share.

[Andrew]

Gillard's managed to pass loads of important beneficial legislation - most of it initially unpopular, but polls show the tide is turning with most people in support of some of the big ticket items, and support growing from a low base on others - but she is absolutely loathed. People won't listen to her and don't respect her. After what had been swirling throughout the media over the past 18 months, it had to build to something like this and Rudd had no choice but to resign as Minister for Foreign Affairs (lest he be sacked anyway on Monday).

Can he win the leadership? Possibly, but it'd be a very different team as at least two of the current ministry have released massively scornful statements, slamming Rudd. Luckily there is already plenty of talent in Labor ranks (Chris Bowen, Doug Cameron, Penny Wong, etc).

Can Gillard beat the Opposition leader at the next election? It's possible. Can Rudd? I think that's more likely - I imagine if Rudd wins, the Conservative Coalition will be thinking of changing their leader too though...

[jamon g]

Looks like Kevin Rudd's bored of being Foreign Secretary ... And look, the Kevin Rudd MP Twitter account has started following a brand new Kevin Rudd PM Twitter account and vice versa.

Clues, I'm sure there are clues here somewhere, if I could only see them...

I love Australian politics. Internecine Shakesperean warfare.

god what a weird move. i was wrong about rudd challenging, just as i was wrong about him being thrown out as leader in the first place. i was like - why would you replace him just before an election when he's so popular and labor will get trounced? and they did, only just scraping in. now i'm like -why would he challenge now when there's absolutely no way he'll get the numbers to win, and he could just wait til after labor loses the election next year and be reinstated as leader?? so yeah, he'll get like 20 votes out of 130, be shafted to the back bench, and labor will lose the next election anyway. i have no idea what this is all about.

[Andrew]

He's a very complicated man.

He will lose on Monday, and he has said were that to occur, he'd go to the backbench and not challenge her again.

Still, he was mobbed in Brisbane today and every poll nationwide shows him as the peoples' preferred Prime Minister. I'd like Labor to be in power after the next election, and despite knowing that he was a terror to work with/for, I'd feel safer with him at the helm. Tony Abbott being as close as he is to the top job is a worry indeed.

[Mike]

Long game for UN Secretary General in 2015?

(And for the record, while I find Rudd quite personable, my politics are closer to Gillard's than to his)

[Andrew]

Long game for UN Secretary General in 2015?

(And for the record, while I find Rudd quite personable, my politics are closer to Gillard's than to his)

He's a brilliant campaigner - he's won over the Australian people again, to the point that people are calling up members of the opposition parties, asking them to vote for him on Monday. He achieved a lot in his term, and she's achieved even more in hers - despite being a minority government.

She hasn't been perfect, but considering everything that's been thrown at her she's done an amazing job. I have no doubt that she's a better negotiator, more considerate, more conciliatory, and less egotistical - essentially a better person; but for whatever reason she doesn't have the support of the people.

[jamon g]

It's because she's not the one in power. basically all the big policy outcomes are the policies of the independents and greens. you have one soundbite of her saying there won't be a carbon tax, and the next one is the green's congratulating her on the carbon tax. no to the resource rent tax, then the greens congratulating her on the resource tax. yes to pokie reform, and then because the factions in victoria don't want it they put in slipper into a speaker position, so they can renege on that promise. slipper for christ sakes - he's been the biggest stain on politics for years, rorting the system as much as possible. any reforms she gets through her back room dealings are simply not interesting to the general public. plus she said she would never challenge rudd for leader, then she did. basically to keep in power she's sold her soul, so even though they're running the country well enough, people can't stand her.

[Andrew]

It's because she's not the one in power. basically all the big policy outcomes are the policies of the independents and greens. you have one soundbite of her saying there won't be a carbon tax, and the next one is the green's congratulating her on the carbon tax. no to the resource rent tax, then the greens congratulating her on the resource tax. yes to pokie reform, and then because the factions in victoria don't want it they put in slipper into a speaker position, so they can renege on that promise. slipper for christ sakes - he's been the biggest stain on politics for years, rorting the system as much as possible. any reforms she gets through her back room dealings are simply not interesting to the general public. plus she said she would never challenge rudd for leader, then she did. basically to keep in power she's sold her soul, so even though they're running the country well enough, people can't stand her.

I can't agree with all of that. Were it up to her, there wouldn't be a "Carbon tax", but she did say the day before the election that her aim was for an emissions trading scheme, just like Rudd wanted, and just like John Howard wanted - with the make-up of the parliament, some compromise was required so we end up with a (set) price on carbon for a while, then a proper ETS. No biggie. The real issue is that because of the reporting of the issue people actually think it's a "carbon tax" that'll show up on their grocery docket, or their payslip, when in fact most people will be better off from July 1 on account of the tax cuts and welfare payment increases. The very fact that journalists call it a "carbon tax" is a demonstration of bias - that's the opposition's line; the legislation refers to it as a "price on carbon", imposed on the top 500 polluting businesses in the nation.(Also, she never said she opposed the "mining tax"; she had to sort it out with the mining companies - and she kinda did do that.)The thing is the last Essential poll where they asked people about specific policies, Australians either approved of, of the trend showed growing approval of all the major policies in the debate - "mining tax", National Broadband Network, even the "Carbon tax" - so, people like the policies (pretty much), inflation is under control, unemployment is low, interest rates are low, wages are up and taxes are down, YET people still think this is a terrible government that is destroying the country.

[Andrew]

It's because she's not the one in power. basically all the big policy outcomes are the policies of the independents and greens. you have one soundbite of her saying there won't be a carbon tax, and the next one is the green's congratulating her on the carbon tax. no to the resource rent tax, then the greens congratulating her on the resource tax. yes to pokie reform, and then because the factions in victoria don't want it they put in slipper into a speaker position, so they can renege on that promise. slipper for christ sakes - he's been the biggest stain on politics for years, rorting the system as much as possible. any reforms she gets through her back room dealings are simply not interesting to the general public. plus she said she would never challenge rudd for leader, then she did. basically to keep in power she's sold her soul, so even though they're running the country well enough, people can't stand her.

I can't agree with all of that. Were it up to her, there wouldn't be a "Carbon tax", but she did say the day before the election that her aim was for an emissions trading scheme, just like Rudd wanted, and just like John Howard wanted - with the make-up of the parliament, some compromise was required so we end up with a (set) price on carbon for a while, then a proper ETS. No biggie. The real issue is that because of the reporting of the issue people actually think it's a "carbon tax" that'll show up on their grocery docket, or their payslip, when in fact most people will be better off from July 1 on account of the tax cuts and welfare payment increases. The very fact that journalists call it a "carbon tax" is a demonstration of bias - that's the opposition's line; the legislation refers to it as a "price on carbon", imposed on the top 500 polluting businesses in the nation.(Also, she never said she opposed the "mining tax"; she had to sort it out with the mining companies - and she kinda did do that.)The thing is the last Essential poll where they asked people about specific policies, Australians either approved of, of the trend showed growing approval of all the major policies in the debate - "mining tax", National Broadband Network, even the "Carbon tax" - so, people like the policies (pretty much), inflation is under control, unemployment is low, interest rates are low, wages are up and taxes are down, YET people still think this is a terrible government that is destroying the country.

[jamon g]

no no, people just don't like her, they don't think she's destroying the country. rudd tried to bring in the ets, but her and swan rejected it, which has come out now. she only brought it in for the greens support. you can't deny that for sure. what she just did with the pokie reform is really despicable politics. people aren't stupid - they don't think there's a tax on their groceries, but they know if you just introduce a tax, and at the same time drop all of the green initiatives to reduce carbon emissions in order to bring the budget back to surplus, that you're just playing politics.

[Andrew]

no no, people just don't like her, they don't think she's destroying the country. rudd tried to bring in the ets, but her and swan rejected it, which has come out now. she only brought it in for the greens support. you can't deny that for sure. what she just did with the pokie reform is really despicable politics. people aren't stupid - they don't think there's a tax on their groceries, but they know if you just introduce a tax, and at the same time drop all of the green initiatives to reduce carbon emissions in order to bring the budget back to surplus, that you're just playing politics.

Actually, Rudd had canvassed dumping the ETS 2 months before it happened, in response to the very successful "great big new tax on everything" campaign from Tony Abbott. "People aren't stupid"? Are you mad? Of course they are! They're preferring the Conservative Coalition as government despite their lack of policies and the Labor government's long list of achievements.The "carbon tax" is a far bigger deal than just tokenistic environment concern - it represents the first step in a fundamental reshaping of the economy. It'd be an easy sell, but one thing Gillard's government has been plagued by which also applies to Rudd's government is an inability to declare their achievements - the "carbon tax" is in effect a fine on businesses either too dumb or too irresponsible to act in reducing their own pollution.

The poker machine reforms were a policy I wholeheartedly believed in, however knowing now that Rudd had been interacting with Clubs NSW and/or Clubs Australia against the government kinda muddies things up a bit.

I don't agree with their stance, but hot-damn the clubs ran a good campaign against the changes - I live across the road from an RSL Club; the walls on the toilets were adorned with inflammatory posters (which I did my best to tear down), every table had a cup of pencils and flyers/petitions to be signed, they organised buses to send people to community cabinets opposing the changes, television football (Rugby League) commentators spoke openly about the changes (erroneously calling them a "pokie tax"), and every single club staff member wearing t-shirts saying "Who voted for me to lose my job?".

Edited by Andrew, 25 February 2012 - 01:45 PM.

[jamon g]

all i know is, i'm a labor voter, but everytime she does something she swore not to do, or doesn't do something she promised to, everyone i talk to rights her off. radio hosts call her jul-liar. you just can't get voter traction on that.

[Andrew]

all i know is, i'm a labor voter, but everytime she does something she swore not to do, or doesn't do something she promised to, everyone i talk to rights her off. radio hosts call her jul-liar. you just can't get voter traction on that.

Those radio hosts are Liberals, unabashedly. It truly is a shame that they have the influence they do, but there's nothing we can do about it at this stage. I know all the same that you do - the problem is that all in all, she's achieved a lot - the price on carbon being the biggest one: despite the stupid claims of the Conservative Coalition, the bill was passed - it's law, and it will come into effect from May. The means test for the private health rebate is another one that Rudd failed to pass time and again - but people don't know about it.

In addition to all this, the economy's chugging long nicely, and all rational, reasonable analysis of all the major indicators point to a pretty good government maintaining a pretty good country in which to live (all things considered).

The media has its role in all of this - with every policy change, even the more sensible broadsheet newspapers track down some whiner willing to say that they will "suffer" as a result - there's this new phenomenon of the 150k "battler" or 250k "battler" household, in a nation where the median household income is about 50k.

Edited by Andrew, 25 February 2012 - 02:41 PM.

[jamon g]

yep to all above, add to the fact the media hates abbott as well, and call him crazy (which he is) and it comes down to the fact people just barely prefer a crazy guy to a liar, and a megalomaniac in rudd to both of them. also people hate the fact they voted for labor but it's the independents and greens that are pulling the strings. also no one voted for the mandates they're instituting now, they went to the election saying they wouldn't institute. they can only be a one term govt. in this situation. if it was anyone but abbott in opposition leader they would be at 5% in the polls not 20%

[Andrew]

yep to all above, add to the fact the media hates abbott as well, and call him crazy (which he is) and it comes down to the fact people just barely prefer a crazy guy to a liar, and a megalomaniac in rudd to both of them. also people hate the fact they voted for labor but it's the independents and greens that are pulling the strings. also no one voted for the mandates they're instituting now, they went to the election saying they wouldn't institute. they can only be a one term govt. in this situation. if it was anyone but abbott in opposition leader they would be at 5% in the polls not 20%

The problem is those same independents and Greens would have just as much pull over Abbott if they had sided with him - that's how a minority government works.

[jamon g]

er no - they would have gone back to the polls, as they wouldn't have given the greens the carbon tax.
the carbon tax is a scam, it's already being priced into the domestic market prices for power and food and heavy carbon industries will shift offshore without subsidies, which they'll get so nothing will change. the money's not being channelled back into green power as promised, but to shore up the deficit. if they were serious, they would have spent that 42 billion dollars on the white elephant broadband network which no one will use, and made serious green power plants. labor is just all over the place.
before the election she came over to WA and said she wouldn't reduce the gst amount to WA, this week they've announced a reduction from 74c to 55 cents in the dollar! basically they can't get a federal seat in WA now. Once rudd is dumped Monday they won't get a seat in Queensland either. Before the election they said they wouldn't increase the public service austerity from the 3% amount but now they've announced it increasing to 5% to desperately try keep the budget in surplus. they can't get a federal seat in Canberra now because of the public service job losses that are coming. The huge rorting by the NSW labor party means they'll struggle there, and now the back down on the pokies means they'll struggle in Victoria. I don't think Victoria and NSW realise how on the nose labor is in the other states because of they're policy backflips, it mustn't get reported there, but these are some of the reasons labor is dying a sharp death.

[garjones]

poker machines in oz are a bit weird, half the pub turned over to compulsive gamblers. i've never seen anywhere else that has quite the same setup. a british pub may have 1 or 2 machines used occassionally but the ones i saw in sydney settled in for the night to shovel in coins.