# Turnbull for PM



## nioka (1 May 2010)

It looks like Turnbull now has the numbers to regain the leadership of the Liberals. I would be surprised if there would not be some Abbot supporters that are losing faith in his ability to win government and they are switching back to favouring Malcolm.

I may even change my vote and vote Coalition again if he is the contender for PM. No way would I ever vote for Abbott.


----------



## Beej (1 May 2010)

It's good that it looks like Turnbull has decided to stay on. He needs to sit back and let Tony Abbot lose the next election though I think, and then strike - he will have a much stronger leadership position then and would stand a very good chance of winning the following election.

My 2c worth anyway.

Cheers,

Beej


----------



## wayneL (1 May 2010)

Looks like the liberal conservative ideal is dying in the Liberal Party and the soicial democratic liberals (not liberal in the true sense at all) are ascendant. 

They might as well rebrand themselves the Liberal Democrats and admit that they (and the Oz public it seems) have lurched to the left.

Why now vote Liberal when you can just vote Labour? Why replace one lot of social democrats with another?

Bad move Australia.


----------



## nioka (1 May 2010)

wayneL said:


> They might as well rebrand themselves the Liberal Democrats and admit that they (and the Oz public it seems) have lurched to the left.




Why is that a bad thing. Capitalism went too far and allowed the world to be controlled by too few that had the power of money behind them. They abused that power with greed,greed and more greed.

 If we live in a democratic society, and we claim to do that, then we need a parliament that will give everyone a fair go. A fair go will reward effort, reward investment and yet look after those that can not manage in a reasonable way. It will manage our culture, our enviroment,our security and suppy a health system that is affordable for all of us.

We need a political party that includes opposition thinking in their decision making. Not one party that is in government that doesn't listen to opposite views and an opposition party that opposes everything the government wants to do just because it is the opposition party.

Malcolm Turnbull, in my opinion takes, a broad look at the situation, is an intelligent man, has shown that he can be successful in management. I would trust him enough to let him show how he would manage the government of this country.


----------



## IFocus (1 May 2010)

wayneL said:


> Looks like the liberal conservative ideal is dying in the Liberal Party and the soicial democratic liberals (not liberal in the true sense at all) are ascendant.
> 
> They might as well rebrand themselves the Liberal Democrats and admit that they (and the Oz public it seems) have lurched to the left.
> 
> ...




Actually I would argue the current extreme right wing stance is an abnormally created by Howard unlike the traditional Liberal position under previous Liberal PM's Fraser, Snedden, McMahon,Gorton, Holt and even Menzies.


----------



## nulla nulla (1 May 2010)

Beej said:


> It's good that it looks like Turnbull has decided to stay on. He needs to sit back and let Tony Abbot lose the next election though I think, and then strike - he will have a much stronger leadership position then and would stand a very good chance of winning the following election.
> 
> My 2c worth anyway.
> 
> ...




Malcolm should stay on, sit on the back bench and let Tony Abbott self destruct through this years election. When the Liberal's do their usual "post election defeat" elect a new leader thing, Malcolm should continue to sit on the back bench and not push for leadership until approximately 18 months before the 2013 election. By then the electorate will probably have had enough of Kevin Rudd. Also, Kevin Rudd will probably make the mistake of not standing aside for Julia Gillard.


----------



## wayneL (1 May 2010)

IFocus said:


> Actually I would argue the current extreme right wing stance is an abnormally created by Howard unlike the traditional Liberal position under previous Liberal PM's Fraser, Snedden, McMahon,Gorton, Holt and even Menzies.




I don't think Howard was extreme right at all, however I do take your point on Fraser et al.


----------



## wayneL (1 May 2010)

nioka said:


> Why is that a bad thing. Capitalism went too far and allowed the world to be controlled by too few that had the power of money behind them. They abused that power with greed,greed and more greed.




Well what went to far was certainly not pure capitalism at all, it was governemnt facilitated corporatism... big difference. Also big statism and middle class welfare thrived under Howard. That ain't capitalism.

But even if social democracy is your favourite poison, there should be some sort of balance, a counterpoint if you like. Social democracy without opposition will result in a slovenly high tax economy with little aspiration, because production is punished in favour of non-producers.

e.g. Britain in the 60's & 70's


----------



## Whiskers (1 May 2010)

Turnbull wins back leadership... wow wouldn't that shake things up a bit, not just for the libs but the gov too.

ETS whizzed off the shelf in a flash before it even had a chance to gather dust, for starters?


----------



## wayneL (1 May 2010)

Bring back Pete FFS.


----------



## Julia (1 May 2010)

nioka said:


> It looks like Turnbull now has the numbers to regain the leadership of the Liberals.



Does he?  Can you let us have a link to this?
He didn't exactly demonstrate any understanding of good leadership when he had the chance.


----------



## nioka (1 May 2010)

Julia said:


> Does he?  Can you let us have a link to this?
> He didn't exactly demonstrate any understanding of good leadership when he had the chance.




No link as such. I can see no other reason why Turnbull would have a change of mind and you will have to admit that there must be some liberal MPs that are not happy with Abbotts performance. Turnbull only lost by one vote so it only really needs one to reverse their vote. I thought he did display leadership but Abbott would not support his leader.

Wayne,
           I do not suggest we need to have an opposition that goes along with everything the government wants to do. We do need a strong opposition to review their performance but that does not mean that they should oppose everything 100% without good reason.


----------



## wayneL (1 May 2010)

nioka said:


> Wayne,
> I do not suggest we need to have an opposition that goes along with everything the government wants to do. We do need a strong opposition to review their performance but that does not mean that they should oppose everything 100% without good reason.




Agree, but there is probably good reason to oppose 100% of everything they do. </hyperbolealert>


----------



## drsmith (1 May 2010)

The Coalition now has a viable option for treasurer (again) but the cupboard is still bare in terms of ready prime ministerial talent.


----------



## Tink (2 May 2010)

I knew he would come back

No way he would give up politics.

He is a feisty one, that one.


----------



## Calliope (2 May 2010)

drsmith said:


> The Coalition now has a viable option for treasurer (again) but the cupboard is still bare in terms of ready prime ministerial talent.




Laurie Oaks who has at last seen through Rudd, sees Abbott's problem as his lack of serious policy. His summation is very apt;

"Thought bubbles won't get him into The Lodge. What they mainly show is lack of thought".

Another serious handicap for Abbott is having no attack dogs on his front bench.

His front bench doesn't scare Rudd, but it scares me.


----------



## noco (2 May 2010)

Calliope said:


> Laurie Oaks who has at last seen through Rudd, sees Abbott's problem as his lack of serious policy. His summation is very apt;
> 
> "Thought bubbles won't get him into The Lodge. What they mainly show is lack of thought".
> 
> ...




Upon listening to Lauire Oaks interview Andrew Robb on Ch9 this am, Robb pointed to the fact that the coalition have been hamstrong on developing policies untill the Henry tax review is released. A political ploy the Labor have been stringing out  to hamper the coalition. 

I beleive the "thought bubbles" were a ploy by Abbott to open deabte and seek reactions from both the voters and the media and imho should not be regarded as Coalition policy.

The reason why Labor has withheld the tax review is now very obvious. A political tactic which is common to the Labor Party.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (2 May 2010)

nioka said:


> Capitalism went too far and allowed the world to be controlled by too few that had the power of money behind them. They abused that power with greed,greed and more greed.



Nioka,
Please research Oligarchy and corporate fascism (Corporatocracy). 

Real capitalism gives ordinary people the chance to be something of their choosing.


----------



## nioka (2 May 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Real capitalism gives ordinary people the chance to be something of their choosing.




In an Ideal world, yes. What we have had is corrupted capitalism. Would you dispute that.


----------



## wayneL (2 May 2010)

nioka said:


> In an Ideal world, yes. What we have had is corrupted capitalism. Would you dispute that.



Therefore not true capitalism.

Therefore capitalism has not failed.


----------



## nioka (2 May 2010)

wayneL said:


> Therefore not true capitalism.
> 
> Therefore capitalism has not failed.




 Then the global financial crisis is a mirage!!!!!!!!!!. I'm glad it wasn't real !!!!!!


----------



## wayneL (2 May 2010)

nioka said:


> Then the global financial crisis is a mirage!!!!!!!!!!. I'm glad it wasn't real !!!!!!



Of course it was real, it just wasn't a failing of "capitalism".


----------



## nioka (2 May 2010)

wayneL said:


> Of course it was real, it just wasn't a failing of "capitalism".




You mean they just droppd the ball short of the try line.. Or did it get the swine flu by "pigging out" at the trough.

 By the way what came first, the chicken or the egg.

 And
"Only dead fish go with the flow."

Those that swim against the current tire easy and often drown.


----------



## Putty7 (2 May 2010)

Technically you could argue it was a mirage because the strength of the fiat currency is also a mirage as are the markets around the world that all fell at the same time and are mostly controlled and market made by the banks who crashed and crashed them, its a mystery wrapped in an enigma 

Abbott was Howards attack dog, he was called on by Howard as was Joe Hockey at the time of Malcoms fall from grace as it were, Joe stepped aside at the last giving Tony the run, he was needed to put a dent in Rudds credibility as Turnball was being made to look like a buffoon, he has done that to a fair extent, who they have to take the party to the next election is anyones guess but don't write of Peter Costello just yet. 

Malcom may want to take the ETS to Stephen Kings pet semitary before he tries riding that dead horse through the gates of Parliment.


----------



## drsmith (2 May 2010)

What's the alternative ?


----------



## drsmith (2 May 2010)

Putty7 said:


> .....don't write of Peter Costello just yet.



He's no longer got a seat.


----------



## Putty7 (2 May 2010)

drsmith said:


> He's no longer got a seat.




True, but would they find him one in time if he was the only one with any credibility.


----------



## drsmith (2 May 2010)

How could they do that before the next election ?

A Costello led government with Malcolm turnbull as treasurer has a bit going for it, but those two are not exactly bosom buddies. The other way round however is unimaginable and Tony Abbott is virtually unelectable as Prime Minister.

One however is left to wonder how much Peter Costello has been slamming his own boot up his own backside given recent events.


----------



## Putty7 (2 May 2010)

drsmith said:


> How could they do that before the next election ?
> 
> A Costello led government with Malcolm turnbull as treasurer has a bit going for it, but those two are not exactly bosom buddies.




I guess the other thing is Dr Smith, would they want to take Government in the next Election, it doesn't appear as though things are going to improve a lot during the next term and if Rudd doesn't backflip on the mining tax he will have made some powerful enemies, the Libs lost the last election at the best possible time with Labour having to deal with this mess and Howard looking like his saving plans have helped ease the pain, would they prefer to let Labour stew in it for another term ?


----------



## Putty7 (2 May 2010)

drsmith said:


> One however is left to wonder how much Peter Costello has been slamming his own boot up his own backside given recent events.




Agree.


----------



## drsmith (2 May 2010)

Putty7 said:


> I guess the other thing is Dr Smith, would they want to take Government in the next Election, it doesn't appear as though things are going to improve a lot during the next term and if Rudd doesn't backflip on the mining tax he will have made some powerful enemies, the Libs lost the last election at the best possible time with Labour having to deal with this mess and Howard looking like his saving plans have helped ease the pain, would they prefer to let Labour stew in it for another term ?



The new proposed mining tax needed to be presented as reform, not an additional tax on top of state royalties. That would have been a more sound position from which to argue for an overall increase.

The Howard government had a wealth of revenue from an economy stimulated by a resources boom to reform tax. Instead however he wasted it on electoral bribary in the form of middle class welfare and on over generous superannuation concessions. He should have been fixing holes in the tax revenue base and reducing rates further, not adding holes to it.

Another term of this Labor government and we might all be stewing in something rather awful by the end of it.


----------



## wayneL (3 May 2010)

nioka said:


> You mean they just droppd the ball short of the try line.. Or did it get the swine flu by "pigging out" at the trough.
> 
> By the way what came first, the chicken or the egg.
> 
> ...




I don't know what my quote about fish has to do with capitalism or some bastardisation of it, but by the tone of your replies I can see that "capitalism has failed" is a cherished belief of yours. Any challenge to that seems upsetting for you resulting in these illogical and laughable riposte's.

We shall however see what the modern interpretation of Keynsesianism does over the next few years. For a hint, look for Mervyn King's recent comments


----------



## Tink (3 May 2010)

Looks like Nick Minchin and John Howard arent too happy with Malcolm's decision to stay.

I think Abbott is putting on a good front, saying that after the next election he will be putting Malcolm on the front bench.

We will see

I think Malcolm does have alot to offer in politics


----------



## Calliope (3 May 2010)

Tink said:


> I think Malcolm does have alot to offer in politics




Of course. Most Labor supporters would prefer Turnbull to Abbott. But in my opinion neither of them has good leadership qualities. 

Neither of course does Rudd, but the above two can't match him in spin.


----------



## Wanton (3 May 2010)

Putty7 said:


> I guess the other thing is Dr Smith, would they want to take Government in the next Election, it doesn't appear as though things are going to improve a lot during the next term and if Rudd doesn't backflip on the mining tax he will have made some powerful enemies, the Libs lost the last election at the best possible time with Labour having to deal with this mess and Howard looking like his saving plans have helped ease the pain, would they prefer to let Labour stew in it for another term ?




Throughout our history when the going got tough for Australia it is the Labor party that the people turned to.  ie: Curtin*, Whitlam*, Hawke/Keating and now Rudd.  In every case when the libs returned to power they rode on the back of the massive economic and strategic reforms that Labor enacted.  ie; Post WWII boom, post Hawke/Keating superannuation, labor market and financial industry restrusture including the floating of the $A.   They ride the boom and than they usually bust it and Labor is re-elected to patch things up again.

The shame is the Costello was not given the Chalice in time to fight the last election, I think he would have been a good PM, certainly better than the present contender will ever be if he got the chance, which I predict he will not.  PS: Do not underestimate Malcolm.  He is one of the most talented people in this country.  Even better still he has not yet become a politician, but like all good things that will inevitable change.

*Curtin, Autralia needed a patriot to protect it in war.
*Whitlam's legacy is exit Vietnam and total review of Australia's then inadequate health system.

Wanton


----------



## nioka (3 May 2010)

wayneL said:


> by the tone of your replies I can see that "capitalism has failed" is a cherished belief of yours. Any challenge to that seems upsetting for you resulting in these illogical and laughable riposte's.




You are getting me wrong. I am a believer in capitalism. But I am disgusted in the corrupted version of capitalism that has dominated the world lately. We have not seen true capitalistic value rule but we have seen a greedy few thieve from the passive capitalists to a point where the system collapsed. I suggest that Turnbull may be closer to ideal capitalism than any of the other contenders.

We needed a Rudd to break the monopoly of "big money". We need a Turnbull to reestablish true capitalism.


----------



## GCrenegade (3 May 2010)

I must say as one of the younger generation the whole political process irritates the hell out of me.  Tony Abbott's stance on everything is to oppose it beacause we are the opposition what a load of rubbish, you are there to run the country for the population.  I have voted in the last three elections and the first two I voted for Howard and the Liberals as I thought they were doing a good job of steering the country into the right direction, but the last election I felt that they had lost touch with what the greater population wanted and so I voted Labour.  At this stage I would be voting for Rudd and Labour again as I think that although Rudd and Labour have done plenty wrong the alternative is far worse with Tony Abbot and a Liberal Party that has no solid policies and to attack and throw cheap shots.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (3 May 2010)

> You are getting me wrong. I am a believer in capitalism. But I am disgusted in the corrupted version of capitalism that has dominated the world lately. We have not seen true capitalistic value rule but we have seen a greedy few thieve from the passive capitalists to a point where the system collapsed. I suggest that Turnbull may be closer to ideal capitalism than any of the other contenders.



I disagree, I say that Abott has more to offer. 



> We needed a Rudd to break the monopoly of "big money". We need a Turnbull to reestablish true capitalism.



Are you saying this is a kind of hegelian dialectic?


----------



## nioka (3 May 2010)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Are you saying this is a kind of hegelian dialectic?




This is a distinct possibility and is well worth researching. More likely it is just greed by a few with no morals that have a facility available to them to bleed the rest of society dry.

I've reached a position in life where I have all I need in this world (with the possible exception of the youth pill) and I tend to look past material posessions. Many of my friends are suffering the result of investing their life savings in schemes that robbed them of a happy retirement. This is the result of unfettered capitalism. 

I used to live in an age where you did not need to lock your car or your house and a handshake was all you needed to enter a contract. I treat investment as i would the security of all other things. ie watch out for thieves and those conspiring to take you down.


----------



## wayneL (3 May 2010)

nioka said:


> You are getting me wrong. I am a believer in capitalism. But I am disgusted in the corrupted version of capitalism that has dominated the world lately. We have not seen true capitalistic value rule but we have seen a greedy few thieve from the passive capitalists to a point where the system collapsed.



OK, apologies. We are on the same page there. 




> I suggest that Turnbull may be closer to ideal capitalism than any of the other contenders.
> 
> We needed a Rudd to break the monopoly of "big money". We need a Turnbull to reestablish true capitalism.




Here I disagree.  Turnbull is if the "Goldman Sachs Set" and would perpetuate the corrupt corporatism seen thus far ==>> IMO <<===

I may be wrong there, but that is my impression.


----------



## nioka (3 May 2010)

wayneL said:


> Here I disagree.  Turnbull is if the "Goldman Sachs Set" and would perpetuate the corrupt corporatism seen thus far ==>> IMO <<===
> 
> I may be wrong there, but that is my impression.




This is where I hope you are wrong. I think Turnbull WAS part of the GS set but I suspect that he has higher motives these days. If he was still a follower of the GS principles he would still be a merchant banker and not be wasting his time in politics. That is my impression.

Set a thief to catch a thief !!!!


----------



## noco (3 May 2010)

Wanton said:


> Throughout our history when the going got tough for Australia it is the Labor party that the people turned to.  ie: Curtin*, Whitlam*, Hawke/Keating and now Rudd.  In every case when the libs returned to power they rode on the back of the massive economic and strategic reforms that Labor enacted.  ie; Post WWII boom, post Hawke/Keating superannuation, labor market and financial industry restrusture including the floating of the $A.   They ride the boom and than they usually bust it and Labor is re-elected to patch things up again.
> 
> The shame is the Costello was not given the Chalice in time to fight the last election, I think he would have been a good PM, certainly better than the present contender will ever be if he got the chance, which I predict he will not.  PS: Do not underestimate Malcolm.  He is one of the most talented people in this country.  Even better still he has not yet become a politician, but like all good things that will inevitable change.
> 
> ...




Wanton, you're not serious are you? You are joking about Labor's history of course!!

Malcolm Tutnbull is Labor's best asset. That's why they are pleased he has back flipped.

Perhaps Turbull should join Rudd's gymnastics troupe.


----------



## Julia (3 May 2010)

nioka said:


> Many of my friends are suffering the result of investing their life savings in schemes that robbed them of a happy retirement. This is the result of unfettered capitalism.



I'm not sure you should blame capitalism for what is more likely an individual's personal greed and/or ignorance.



> I used to live in an age where you did not need to lock your car or your house and a handshake was all you needed to enter a contract. I treat investment as i would the security of all other things. ie watch out for thieves and those conspiring to take you down.



Whilst I don't ever remember not feeling the need to lock house or car, I share your regret at what seems like the loss of honour.


----------



## GumbyLearner (3 May 2010)

nioka said:


> This is where I hope you are wrong. I think Turnbull WAS part of the GS set but I suspect that he has higher motives these days. If he was still a follower of the GS principles he would still be a merchant banker and not be wasting his time in politics. That is my impression.
> 
> Set a thief to catch a thief !!!!




You should read *Spycatcher* nioka. Turntable received notable acclaim in his silky days for that. But unfortunately I don't have much faith in the man because of the practices of GS and their marketing of loss making mortgages to only bet against them and then ask for dole payments from the US public to bail them out. Talk about a conflict of interest/profiting from position etc... in the US housing market... woeful !!!

No thanks Turntable. You can keep your dodgy schemes out of our system. Go back to the private sector where you can hurt the people less.


----------



## nioka (3 May 2010)

Julia said:


> I'm not sure you should blame capitalism for what is more likely an individual's personal greed and/or ignorance.
> 
> 
> Whilst I don't ever remember not feeling the need to lock house or car, I share your regret at what seems like the loss of honour.




I don't think that you can blame the individuals greed if they left their worldy savings in the hands of a trusted financial institution only to find that the trust was misplaced. Remember these people were brought up with trust as a given and the bank manager was respected as being a pillar of society.

and
I lived for 25 years in a house where there wasn't even a lockable front and back door.In fact the front door was hardly ever shut. The car I learnt to drive with had an ignition switch, no key.


----------



## GumbyLearner (3 May 2010)

nioka said:


> I don't think that you can blame the individuals greed if they left their worldy savings in the hands of a trusted financial institution only to find that the trust was misplaced. Remember these people were brought up with trust as a given and the bank manager was respected as being a pillar of society.
> 
> and
> I lived for 25 years in a house where there wasn't even a lockable front and back door.In fact the front door was hardly ever shut. The car I learnt to drive with had an ignition switch, no key.




I noticed that your sig says "Think outside the square".

Well what I can say is without any secret handshakes or other ridiculous allegiances.

Be yourself and protect your hard-earned. Because what is presently being served up in Canberra sure won't.


----------



## nioka (3 May 2010)

GumbyLearner said:


> I noticed that your sig says "Think outside the square".
> 
> Well what I can say is without any secret handshakes or other ridiculous allegiances.
> 
> Be yourself and protect your hard-earned. Because what is presently being served up in Canberra sure won't.




I'll continue to think outside the square and manage to live and prosper with whatever either side dishes up. I have a flexible plan. I also have a clear conscience and sleep well at night.


----------



## noco (4 May 2010)

The latest News Poll appears to be favouring Tony Abbott more and more each week.

On a two party preferred Coalition  51% up 5%
                                  Labor      49% down 5%

Persoanl ratings  Rudd  50%  down 6%
                       Abbott  32%  up  3%

Abbott has to do little while Rudd shoots himself in both feet.

At last the Australian public are starting to wake up to Rudd's spin. lies and back flips.


----------



## Julia (4 May 2010)

It's good to see the government being slammed in the polls and to have lost their first place, but my guess is that it reflects more dissatisfaction with Mr Rudd than any particular liking for Mr Abbott.

Mr Abbott should be taking every possible advantage of the government's fall from grace to start talking about a few of his own policies or he will quickly lose that advantage, given the government's capacity to politically pick itself up again.


----------



## Calliope (4 May 2010)

Julia said:


> It's good to see the government being slammed in the polls and to have lost their first place, but my guess is that it reflects more dissatisfaction with Mr Rudd than any particular liking for Mr Abbott.
> 
> Mr Abbott should be taking every possible advantage of the government's fall from grace to start talking about a few of his own policies or he will quickly lose that advantage, given the government's capacity to politically pick itself up again.




I agree Julia. The polls show that they  haven't warmed to Abbott. It is frustrating that the Coalition can't take advantage of Rudd's gutlessness which the media is now exposing daily. It has been clearly demonstrated that Rudd is no leader but just a cunning opportunist.

And yet Labor will win the election. The one to gain most from his exposure will be Ms Gillard and certainly not Turnbull who Rudd turned, and is now tainted.


----------



## drsmith (4 May 2010)

Julia said:


> Mr Abbott should be taking every possible advantage of the government's fall from grace to start talking about a few of his own policies or he will quickly lose that advantage, given the government's capacity to politically pick itself up again.



The first bit of Henry Tax Review Malcolm Turnbull should be instructed to read is the resources rent tax. His skills should then be turned to negotiation with the miners.

The Coalition could gain much by reaching agreement on the detail of the RRT with the mining industry before the government does.


----------



## Pivotonian (7 May 2010)

nioka, I think there is a pretty good argument that the distortions caused by state interference in fact cause many of the problems with our system of "corrupt capitalism" as you put it.  The Australian housing market and the US banking system being two recent examples of massive government intervention preventing a much needed correction and producing a worse longer term outcome as a result.

What makes us think that a bunch of government bureaucrats are better equipped to "manage" the economy than the market itself?

I'm not necessarily arguing for complete laissez-faire capitalism, but I am saying that had we let the market deal with the issues, the short term pain may have been even sharper but the long term result would have been much better.  We had a massive boom, and every boom needs a proper bust to correct the distortions and return to "rationality".  Like the Greeks right now, we didn't want to take our medicine and as a result we will end up paying a bigger price.

Nothing should ever be "too big to fail".

Oh, and there's no way I'm ever voting for Tony Abbott.  The prospect of him being PM is about as scary as it gets.


----------



## springhill (19 May 2011)

This guy makes me ill, Abbott has Gillard on the ropes, she can't lay a glove on him and today Turnbull comes out and bags the Libs "Direct Action" plan. Must be good for Gillard to have her greatest ally in opposition camp.
What a self serving sack of ****.


----------



## noco (19 May 2011)

springhill said:


> This guy makes me ill, Abbott has Gillard on the ropes, she can't lay a glove on him and today Turnbull comes out and bags the Libs "Direct Action" plan. Must be good for Gillard to have her greatest ally in opposition camp.
> What a self serving sack of ****.




I were Abbott, I'd be telling Turnbull to either pull his head in or p..s off to the Labor side of politics.He is certainly not a team player. Perhaps Gillard put him up to it.


----------



## Julia (19 May 2011)

Agree entirely with both above.
However, Mr Turnbull is doing himself no favours with his behaviour.  His colleagues and the electorate will be duly noting his egocentricity and lack of loyalty.


----------



## Knobby22 (20 May 2011)

The conservatives in Britain have voted for massive climate action to a level of 50% less emmissions *with the backing of big industry *as England seeks to change its reliance on (old) energy and reduce its climate change footprint.

Malcolm knows this and is looking at his standing long term. He may succeed for it is not the hard right conservative idealogues that select the party in power as they always vote the same way.

We shall see if his judgement is good come the next election or whether Abbott method of following the Republican negativity model is successful. Abbot does have to his advantage a cabel of shock jocks willing to distort to support him but again I think they mainly preach to the hard right. You know in the USA, they have actors to be fake callers to push the point rather than real people, fortunately we have not lowered ourselves to this level.

Interesting times.


----------



## sptrawler (20 May 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> The conservatives in Britain have voted for massive climate action to a level of 50% less emmissions *with the backing of big industry *as England seeks to change its reliance on (old) energy and reduce its climate change footprint.
> 
> Malcolm knows this and is looking at his standing long term. He may succeed for it is not the hard right conservative idealogues that select the party in power as they always vote the same way.
> 
> ...




Well Knobby Englands answers should be interesting. I can see now why the push for a softening of the uranium mining ban.


----------



## nioka (20 May 2011)

Turnbull is a small L liberal that would attract those voters that only voted green so they didn't have to vote for Gillard or Abbott. He is more likely to get senate power that any of the others. He is a capitalist at heart and a damn good one at that. Abbott will be delighted with the precedent set by the NSW government regarding retrospective legislation and will be working out what he can do in that regard. He will have more non core promises than Costello ever thought possible. A drovers dog will defeat Gillard. It is long term and control of the Senate that should be the goal.


----------



## springhill (20 May 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> The conservatives in Britain have voted for massive climate action to a level of 50% less emmissions *with the backing of big industry *as England seeks to change its reliance on (old) energy and reduce its climate change footprint.




Is this even achievable? Or feel good politics? Was there a time frame for this? I doubt a realistic one.



Knobby22 said:


> You know in the USA, they have actors to be fake callers to push the point rather than real people, *fortunately we have not lowered ourselves to this level*.




I would not put the house on that.


----------



## IFocus (20 May 2011)

Turnbull has just said what the media wont and Abbott has been caught out but the show will go on and Abbott will take it as a free kick but it is possibly a sign to come once we get to 18 months out from a election.

The problem for Abbott is if a carbon tax is passed and the boats stop and the NBN is progressed to a point of no return he will become a nobody and the leadership will be up for grabs.

So hence all the shrill from a desperate man yes interesting times ahead.


----------



## IFocus (20 May 2011)

nioka said:


> Turnbull is a small L liberal that would attract those voters that only voted green so they didn't have to vote for Gillard or Abbott. He is more likely to get senate power that any of the others. He is a capitalist at heart and a damn good one at that. Abbott will be delighted with the precedent set by the NSW government regarding retrospective legislation and will be working out what he can do in that regard. He will have more non core promises than Costello ever thought possible. A drovers dog will defeat Gillard. It is long term and control of the Senate that should be the goal.





I think you are absolutely on the money Nioka on all your points.


----------



## Knobby22 (20 May 2011)

springhill said:


> Is this even achievable? Or feel good politics? Was there a time frame for this? I doubt a realistic one.
> 
> .




2025


----------



## springhill (20 May 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> 2025




Thanks Knobby, do you have a link?
Wonder if there was any mention of job losses, that's a big target in only 14 years.


----------



## Julia (20 May 2011)

springhill said:


> Thanks Knobby, do you have a link?
> Wonder if there was any mention of job losses, that's a big target in only 14 years.



Indeed.  However, in the account I heard of it yesterday (ABC Radio) it is non binding, i.e. simply a target to aim for.  Probably a bit like Labor government surpluses in Australia.


----------



## Knobby22 (20 May 2011)

Julia said:


> Indeed.  However, in the account I heard of it yesterday (ABC Radio) it is non binding, i.e. simply a target to aim for.  Probably a bit like Labor government surpluses in Australia.




http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/17/uk-halve-carbon-emissions

The UK is to put in place the most ambitious targets on greenhouse gases of any developed country, by halving carbon dioxide emissions by 2025, after a tumultuous week of cabinet rifts on the issue.

Agreeing the targets took weeks of wrangling among ministers, but late on Tuesday afternoon the energy and climate secretary, Chris Huhne, announced to parliament that the "carbon budget" – a 50% emissions cut averaged across the years 2023 to 2027, compared with 1990 levels – would be enshrined in law.

Connie Hedegaard, the European Union's climate change chief, hailed the outcome as "very encouraging" and "an example" to other countries, which she said showed that countries could pursue economic growth while cutting emissions. "This is a recognition that to be very ambitious on public spending [cuts] does not mean you can't be ambitious on climate change targets," she told the Guardian.

David Kennedy, chief executive of the Committee on Climate Change, the government advisory body that proposed the target, said: "This is going to deliver higher [economic] growth for the UK. It could well give us lower electricity prices in the future than our competitors."

Huhne – currently at the centre of claims he persuaded someone else to take speeding penalty points on his behalf – said the government would produce plans later in the year laying out ways to compensate energy-hungry businesses for any competitive disadvantage. The policies necessary to meet the new carbon targets will be set out in October.

Fears that ministers would reject the Committee on Climate Change's proposals for pollution limits in the fourth "carbon budget" had prompted an outcry from environmentalist groups.

The carbon budget runs from 2023 to 2027, part of efforts to meet legally binding emissions cuts of 80% by 2050, and will put the UK on target for 60% cuts by 2030. There will be a review of the budget in 2014, under a compromise.

The chancellor, George Osborne, Phillip Hammond, the transport secretary, and the business secretary, Vince Cable, were against the so-called fourth carbon budget, and secured the review of the ambitious targets should other EU countries fail to match them.

Environmentalists believe the timing of the 2014 review, shortly before an election, would make it difficult for the Conservatives to weaken the targets. The Climate Change Act also stipulates that the plans can only be changed in response to external circumstances.


----------



## IFocus (20 May 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/17/uk-halve-carbon-emissions
> 
> The UK is to put in place the most ambitious targets on greenhouse gases of any developed country, by halving carbon dioxide emissions by 2025, after a tumultuous week of cabinet rifts on the issue.
> 
> ...




Makes the arguments here seem really lame.


----------



## sptrawler (20 May 2011)

It also highlights the stupidity of charging ahead with a plan devised by the goon show.  Instead of adopting a wait and see approach, then implementing a policy that the major players are going to implement.
No that would be too sensible for this government. They would much prefer to invent the square wheel, then try to tell everyone how clever they are.


----------



## sptrawler (20 May 2011)

Anyway getting back on thread, Malcom is giving Tony live practice on how to deal with a w-----er in the midst


----------



## sptrawler (20 May 2011)

Now, later in the day I see Malcolm has got the shovel out and is trying to backfill the hole.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...gain-liberal-mps/story-fn59niix-1226059726470


----------



## springhill (21 May 2011)

Knobby22 said:


> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/may/17/uk-halve-carbon-emissions
> 
> The UK is to put in place the most ambitious targets on greenhouse gases of any developed country, by halving carbon dioxide emissions by 2025, after a tumultuous week of cabinet rifts on the issue.
> 
> ...






IFocus said:


> Makes the arguments here seem really lame.




IFocus, any wonder why the British Parliament chose 1990 rather than 2010 levels? Because in 1990 they omitted 800mT of carbon and recent levels have been around 620-630mT, so in fact THEY ARE ALREADY NEARLY HALF WAY THERE to their 400m target. Cutting emissions by 200mT doesn't sound as grand as 400mT does it?

Oh that's right 1990 were benchmark emissions.
"Benchmark emissions", just another phrase for a number we pulled out of thin air that suits us.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/9466135/uk-pledges-to-cut-carbon-emissions-in-half/


----------



## explod (21 March 2013)

Having consulted myself and opened another can I conclude that it is time to dust this thread off to see if from a Government point of view we might be able to save this wonderful country of ours.

Gillard has no hope against chauvinism and Abbott is too close to the dogma of the Cardinal.  The new Pope cant help as he is busy with the poor and most voter4s in Australia are only worried about their own hip pockets.

As a Green of course my efforts are for working on the ground and at this time realise that most of you are going to have to continue to lose almost everything till it is realised that money is only there so that you do not have to carry your own bag of spuds and chooks with you.  When the money runs out we will see how useful the Merc on the new freeway really is for sustenance.

In the interim Turnbull may at least stop the financial bleeding and get us back to working in Parliament for people and not for blo.dy Parliamentarians.


----------



## drsmith (21 March 2013)

Don't drink too many of those cans there plod.

They will only give you a headache.


----------



## Sean K (14 July 2013)

I don't think it will be too long after the election that Turnbull supporters push him to take the helm. I hope he doesn't and stays a team man for at least one term in government, just to get some stability back in politics. But, I have a feeling he'll be pushed. 

At least he's been honest about the talk and towing the party line.

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...prefer-him-to-tony-abbott-20130714-2pxqm.html


----------



## So_Cynical (14 July 2013)

kennas said:


> I don't think it will be too long after the election that Turnbull supporters push him to take the helm. I hope he doesn't and stays a team man for at least one term in government, just to get some stability back in politics. But, I have a feeling he'll be pushed.
> 
> At least he's been honest about the talk and towing the party line.
> 
> http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...prefer-him-to-tony-abbott-20130714-2pxqm.html




Surely they will move before the election? how can the Noalition go into the election with a leader that has a preferred PM rating significantly lower than MT and Significantly lower than Rudd....there is no Aust, historical precedent that would support Tony winning with such a low preferred PM rating.


----------



## Julia (14 July 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> Surely they will move before the election? how can the Noalition go into the election with a leader that has a preferred PM rating significantly lower than MT and Significantly lower than Rudd....there is no Aust, historical precedent that would support Tony winning with such a low preferred PM rating.



That's probably a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't.
For sure, Malcolm Turnbull is more popular and his leadership might be enough to avert the extraordinary regard people with short memories seem to have for Rudd, but the moral downside of dumping a leader who has successfully fought two Prime Ministers and who has brought the Coalition out of a complete funk, would be considerable imo.

How could the Coalition do this in the face or their criticism of Labor's behaviour in this regard?


----------



## Logique (14 July 2013)

The Left's choice, but not going to happen. 

Tony Abbott will be great PM. Why else would  Labor be so obsessed with him.



> http://www.aec.gov.au/profiles/nsw/wentworth.htm
> ...In terms of area, the division of Wentworth is the smallest division in Australia...


----------



## drsmith (14 July 2013)

For Malcolm Turnbull to return to the leadership of the Liberal Party prior to the next election, he would for a start have to be as dishonest as Kevin Rudd.



> He said there would not be a leadership change in the Liberals before the federal election this year.




http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...prefer-him-to-tony-abbott-20130714-2pxqm.html


----------



## So_Cynical (14 July 2013)

Logique said:


> The Left's choice, but not going to happen.
> 
> Tony Abbott will be great PM. Why else would  Labor be so obsessed with him.




Fine but in order to be PM you have to actually win the election.
~


----------



## sptrawler (14 July 2013)

Logique said:


> The Left's choice, but not going to happen.
> 
> Tony Abbott will be great PM. Why else would  Labor be so obsessed with him.




+1
The coalition would be stupid to follow the Labor party modus operandi of changing your leader, reversing your policy stance as a reaction to polls. 
It just shows a lack of discipline and lack of belief in your party and policy platform.
I don't think there will be much, if any, difference in the election result, with Rudd.


----------



## Some Dude (14 July 2013)

sptrawler said:


> The coalition would be stupid to follow the Labor party modus operandi of changing your leader, reversing your policy stance as a reaction to polls.




Did that work for Abbott originally?


----------



## drsmith (14 July 2013)

Malcolm Turnbull on today's Financial Review Sunday,

http://www.afr.com/sunday


----------



## sptrawler (14 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Did that work for Abbott originally?




Actually, if the polls are accurate nothing has worked for Abbott.
Also again, if the polls are to be believed, policy and policy outcome is inconsequential.
Therefore it would appear unimportant.lol
Rudd is a winner, or so they would have us believe. 
To me, it indicates the polls of two months ago were completely wrong, or the current ones are.Just my opinion.
We will all know the answers soon enough.


----------



## Tink (15 July 2013)

Agree Logique and good article on Turnbull, Kennas. 
Hopefully people realise its not just the leader, its the party they pick.


----------



## Some Dude (15 July 2013)

sptrawler said:


> Actually, if the polls are accurate nothing has worked for Abbott.
> Also again, if the polls are to be believed, policy and policy outcome is inconsequential.
> Therefore it would appear unimportant.lol




And yet many many people, yourself included (from memory, happy to be wrong there), have alluded to the upcoming election before the recent change with Kevin Rudd inferring from the polls some type of vindication, justification, etc. resulting in a change of government.



sptrawler said:


> Rudd is a winner, or so they would have us believe.




I'm not convinced. Anyone who followed the data and polling for 2007 will remember that the polling was showing John Howard at similar levels to Julia Gillard on TPP and yet come election day, the results were a lot closer than previously indicated. At this point, the polls are indicating a generally even race, so I would not be assuming anything.



sptrawler said:


> To me, it indicates the polls of two months ago were completely wrong, or the current ones are.Just my opinion.
> We will all know the answers soon enough.




Or the circumstances have changed. Polling represents a snap shot of opinion in time and people generally place far to much emphasis on polling when trying to divine intention at election time.

For anyone interested in something a bit deeper than headline poll results, try reading these types of blogs (Mark the Ballot).


----------



## sptrawler (15 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> And yet many many people, yourself included (from memory, happy to be wrong there), have alluded to the upcoming election before the recent change with Kevin Rudd inferring from the polls some type of vindication, justification, etc. resulting in a change of government.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




We are on the same page, the silent majority don't bother amswering polls, they have better things to do.IMO

Like I said earlier, it wasn't untill the election date was called, that Gillards unpopularity became apparent.

I, like you, put very little faith in polls. Rudd willl do better than Gillard, but anyone would.


----------



## Some Dude (15 July 2013)

sptrawler said:


> I, like you, put very little faith in polls. Rudd willl do better than Gillard, but anyone would.




Heh.. Faith and polls make for bad hang overs 

Polls have their use as long as one knows how to read them. Sometimes the right question is more important than the right answer. As the skit in Yes Prime Minister muses, results can be influenced if questions are posed accordingly.


----------



## sptrawler (15 July 2013)

Some Dude said:


> Heh.. Faith and polls make for bad hang overs
> 
> Polls have their use as long as one knows how to read them. Sometimes the right question is more important than the right answer. As the skit in Yes Prime Minister muses, results can be influenced if questions are posed accordingly.




Absolutely. 
Also seeing Rudd walking down the street with a camera and seeing the masses of well wishers slapping him on the back. 
It makes me ask myself two questions, first would I go and shake his hand, second why aren't those people out working?
It brings me to the same conclusion as polls, worthless media food.


----------



## Julia (15 July 2013)

sptrawler said:


> We are on the same page, the silent majority don't bother amswering polls, they have better things to do.IMO



  I don't believe for a moment you would refuse to respond to a polling company if they were to approach you.


----------



## sails (15 July 2013)

Julia said:


> I don't believe for a moment you would refuse to respond to a polling company if they were to approach you.





But then SP is hardly one of the SILENT majority...


----------



## sptrawler (15 July 2013)

Julia said:


> I don't believe for a moment you would refuse to respond to a polling company if they were to approach you.




Believe it or not, if I pick up the phone and there is a pause or an unknown voice, I hang up. If it's important they will ring back.
If it's family they ring on the mobile and I ring them back.
Free calls to any mobile.


----------



## Julia (15 July 2013)

sails said:


> But then SP is hardly one of the SILENT majority...



Which was pretty much my point.


----------



## sptrawler (15 July 2013)

sails said:


> But then SP is hardly one of the SILENT majority...




What!!! I'm your quiet reserved type.lol


----------



## boofhead (15 July 2013)

I don't think Turnball is the person to be a PM. There's a slight Costello about him. He seems more for academics. Hawke, Keating, Howard and Rudd can get normal folk behind them. Turnball doesn't seem to have the needed charm. Gillard didn't. Turnball is better as a minister (like Gillard). Mistakes like the Godwin Grech are very telling. In some aspects of economics he can get the right on side but a number of other things you feel like he is semi-selling the party line but he doesn't like it.


----------



## Knobby22 (15 July 2013)

I disagree.
Turnbull comes across as a statesman. To the public he looks and sounds like a possible Prime Minister that could strut the world stage. His other good feature is that he sounds like he believes what he is saying and doesn't resort to repeated mantras unlike a certain other politician.

Maybe he wouldn't be as good a Prime Minister as Abbott but since he looks the part he is more likely to get the votes. He would destroy Rudd imo. Rudd wouldn't want to debate him.


----------



## Calliope (15 July 2013)

If a rusted on Kruddite like boofhead thinks Turnbull is the wrong man, then he must be the right man.


----------



## boofhead (15 July 2013)

I'm not a Kruddite. You should really give up on your deranged personal attacks. Are you Alan Jones? I would love for you to send me a PM where I have shown any support of Rudd or anyone else in politics. I'm generally not interested in cult of personality unlike you (it is all you can talk about).

Turnball has a slight smugness. Over the years since he lost the leadership there have been plenty of things he has said and done that shows how at times he is uncomfortable with Coalition policy. His at times looking uneasy saying the party line makes it look a little sarcastic. Regular viewers of Q and A will know what I mean.


----------



## drsmith (15 July 2013)

Malcolm Turnbull offers his insights on his role within the team from just before 8 minutes into the video segment (yesterday's Financial Review Sunday),

http://www.afr.com/p/business/sunday/nbn_co_takes_to_lobbying_dIKJcsk7HQcwutNpgJ2JrL


----------



## Calliope (15 July 2013)

boofhead said:


> I'm not a Kruddite. You should really give up on your deranged personal attacks. Are you Alan Jones? I would love for you to send me a PM where I have shown any support of Rudd or anyone else in politics. I'm generally not interested in cult of personality unlike you (it is all you can talk about).
> 
> Turnball has a slight smugness. Over the years since he lost the leadership there have been plenty of things he has said and done that shows how at times he is uncomfortable with Coalition policy. His at times looking uneasy saying the party line makes it look a little sarcastic. Regular viewers of Q and A will know what I mean.




You are right boof. I apologise. To call someone a Rudd supporter is a "deranged personal attack" and can be very hurtful.

I am glad to have your assurance that you are "generally not interested in cult of personality", however I find being compared to Alan Jones a somewhat deranged personal attack...almost as bad as being called a Kruddite.


----------



## Julia (15 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> If a rusted on Kruddite like boofhead thinks Turnbull is the wrong man, then he must be the right man.



That's an unreasonable characterisation imo.  I've certainly never found boofhead's posts to be particularly pro-Rudd.  Rather they're thoughtful and pretty objective.



boofhead said:


> I don't think Turnball is the person to be a PM. There's a slight Costello about him. He seems more for academics. Hawke, Keating, Howard and Rudd can get normal folk behind them. Turnball doesn't seem to have the needed charm. Gillard didn't. Turnball is better as a minister (like Gillard). Mistakes like the Godwin Grech are very telling. In some aspects of economics he can get the right on side but a number of other things you feel like he is semi-selling the party line but he doesn't like it.



I agree with your last point.  Especially on climate, it's absolutely clear he's not in favour of the policy which would definitely change if he were leader.
The Godwin Grech mess was awful but one would hope he has acquired a bit more political nous these days.

I do think he's personable, if not actually 'charming'.  He's also good looking, fluent, articulate and well spoken so streets ahead of Mr Abbott in this respect.



Knobby22 said:


> I disagree.
> Turnbull comes across as a statesman. To the public he looks and sounds like a possible Prime Minister that could strut the world stage. His other good feature is that he sounds like he believes what he is saying



Perhaps he does on telecommunications but he doesn't at all on climate.
I do agree about him at least not falling back on slogans which are really starting to grate for me.



> Maybe he wouldn't be as good a Prime Minister as Abbott but since he looks the part he is more likely to get the votes. He would destroy Rudd imo. Rudd wouldn't want to debate him.



They would at least be a match for each other.  Just no contest between Abbott and Rudd in a debate.


----------



## Calliope (15 July 2013)

Julia said:


> That's an unreasonable characterisation imo.  I've certainly never found boofhead's posts to be particularly pro-Rudd.  Rather they're thoughtful and pretty objective.




I guess you are right as usual. Snide remarks boof has made about me e.g. "deranged'" and "Do you work in Abbott's office or something?" and "Are you Alan Jones?" are pretty objective and not personal in your view I suppose.

To return to Turnbull, I think he has come a long way since the Gordon Grech affair, when he had Rudd and Swan on the ropes over misleading parliament over the Utegate affair, and let them off the hook. Now that we have adopted a presidential style of campaigning, where we are pitting two personalities against each other, I think Turnbull would be a better performer than Abbott.


----------



## Macquack (15 July 2013)

Turnbull's biggest problem has always been, and will always be, the *size of his bank balance*.

According to Wikipedia he is worth $186 million, give or take $10 million (BRW Rich List 2010). 

Problem is the average Australian can't relate to him on a financial level and I very much doubt Mal can relate to the struggles of Joe Average. 

His highest calling is Opposition leader.


----------



## sptrawler (15 July 2013)

Macquack said:


> Turnbull's biggest problem has always been, and will always be, the *size of his bank balance*.
> 
> According to Wikipedia he is worth $186 million, give or take $10 million (BRW Rich List 2010).
> 
> ...




I don't think Mr and Mrs Rudds bank balance would be anything to be sneezed at and he is supposed to be Labor. 
So it seems to make the basis of your arguement somewhat flawed.


----------



## Macquack (15 July 2013)

sptrawler said:


> I don't think Mr and Mrs Rudds bank balance would be anything to be sneezed at and he is supposed to be Labor.
> So it seems to make the basis of your arguement somewhat flawed.




Last time I checked, Therese Rein was not Prime Minister.

Average Joe dreams about marrying a wealthy woman.

If Turnbull's wealth had come from his wife, it would look more acceptable.


----------



## sptrawler (15 July 2013)

Macquack said:


> Last time I checked, Therese Rein was not Prime Minister.
> 
> Average Joe dreams about marrying a wealthy woman.
> 
> If Turnbull's wealth had come from his wife, it would look more acceptable.




Oh, my mistake, must a mysogynist thing. eek


----------



## Julia (15 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> I guess you are right as usual. Snide remarks boof has made about me e.g. "deranged'" and "Do you work in Abbott's office or something?" and "Are you Alan Jones?" are pretty objective and not personal in your view I suppose.



Calliope, perhaps consider that those remarks were made in response to your accusation of boofhead being a great fan of Rudd or words to that effect.
I should, however, stay out of other people's fights.  Just get a bit tired of unnecessary stirring.



> To return to Turnbull, I think he has come a long way since the Gordon Grech affair, when he had Rudd and Swan on the ropes over misleading parliament over the Utegate affair, and let them off the hook.



He let them off the hook?  That's not my memory of events.  As I recall the matter,  Mr Turnbull made accusations which turned out to be entirely false, so any suggestion that Turnbull let Swan and Rudd 'off the hook' is less than accurate.

From wiki:


> Utegate (also known as The OzCar affair) refers to a 2009 controversy in Australian federal politics, revolving around allegations made by then Federal Leader of the Opposition and Liberal leader, Malcolm Turnbull, that the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, and/or the Treasurer, Wayne Swan, had acted improperly on behalf of a Queensland car dealer who was seeking financial assistance from a government agency called OzCar, and that they had misled Parliament. Central to this claim was evidence by Treasury official Godwin Grech before a Senate inquiry in June 2009 that a Prime Ministerial adviser had emailed him asking for preferential treatment for the dealer. When the email's text became known, the Prime Minister labelled the email a forgery, and a subsequent police investigation confirmed that the email was never sent. On 4 August 2009, Grech admitted to forging the email.[1] The Auditor-General was also ordered to conduct an investigation. It found no evidence of corruption by the Prime Minister or the Treasurer or their respective offices,[2] but did make adverse findings against Godwin Grech, and highlighted numerous administrative failings in the Treasury.




I really wonder, Calliope, why you so insist on mischaracterising not just members of this forum but historical events.



Macquack said:


> Last time I checked, Therese Rein was not Prime Minister.
> 
> Average Joe dreams about marrying a wealthy woman.
> 
> If Turnbull's wealth had come from his wife, it would look more acceptable.



I disagree entirely.   The fact that Mr Turnbull has had the capacity to put his skills to earning such a good return is absolutely a credit to him.  Why on earth would it be to his detriment?  Surely the country would benefit from the stewardship of someone who has demonstrated personal success and real business acumen, as distinct from the union hacks we have at present.


----------



## Logique (15 July 2013)

Repeating myself,

but Turnbull as a political leader, let alone PM? Shudder. 

OMDB, i.e. Over My... etc.


----------



## Calliope (15 July 2013)

Julia said:


> I really wonder, Calliope, why you so insist on mischaracterising not just members of this forum but historical events.





Wow!!! "mischaracterising". I'm sorry I put you to so much trouble researching my mischaracterisation of "not just members of this forum but historical events". 

You seem intent on "mischaracterising" me. Please take your own advice; 







> I should, however, stay out of other people's fights. Just get a bit tired of unnecessary stirring



 Just stop stirring.


----------



## So_Cynical (15 July 2013)

Logique said:


> Repeating myself,
> 
> but Turnbull as a political leader, let alone PM? Shudder.
> 
> OMDB, i.e. Over My... etc.




With 2 party preferred your going to vote for him if he is leader, and as leader the Noalition is guaranteed a win and with Tony its 50/50, which would you prefer?

50/50 with Tony or 100% with Malcolm?


----------



## banco (15 July 2013)

Calliope said:


> Wow!!! "mischaracterising". I'm sorry I put you to so much trouble researching my mischaracterisation of "not just members of this forum but historical events".
> 
> You seem intent on "mischaracterising" me. Please take your own advice;  Just stop stirring.




The Queensland sun must have fried what's left of your brain if you think the utegate affair was anything but a coalition beatup that was aided by a Treasury official who'd gone over the edge.


----------



## Logique (16 July 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> With 2 party preferred your going to vote for him if he is leader, and as leader the Noalition is guaranteed a win and with Tony its 50/50, which would you prefer?
> 50/50 with Tony or 100% with Malcolm?



Fair comment SC, it's just that I couldn't bring myself to vote Fox for a seat in hen house. 

It's an analogy Labor might think about in the case of El Rudd, although he's only there for the election. Which everybody knows, except him and Ms Rein, that noted benefactor of the unemployed, which seems in her case to be a lucrative endeavour, having offshored her business.

Unemployment is lucrative for the Rudd-Rein family.


----------



## springhill (16 July 2013)

Macquack said:


> Average Joe dreams about marrying a wealthy woman.




What a ridiculously pathetic statement.


----------



## Sean K (8 September 2013)

Thank The Lord the Labour experiment is over. What an absolute shambles. 

Hopefully now a clean transition to Turnbull after the dust settles.


----------



## Julia (8 September 2013)

kennas said:


> Thank The Lord the Labour experiment is over. What an absolute shambles.
> 
> Hopefully now a clean transition to Turnbull after the dust settles.



You're not even going to be open minded enough to give Tony Abbott a go?
No memory of how hopeless Turnbull was when he had his opportunity as Leader?
What is it about Mr Turnbull which so inspires you?


----------



## springhill (9 September 2013)

Julia said:


> You're not even going to be open minded enough to give Tony Abbott a go?
> No memory of how hopeless Turnbull was when he had his opportunity as Leader?
> What is it about Mr Turnbull which so inspires you?




I agree Julia, I don't particularly like Turnbull.

The Libs have had this election in the bag for a long time and he continually did just enough to let everyone know he wasn't happy with the content of his portfolio or the direction the party was taking without having the ticker to come out and say it.

Not a team player.


----------



## drsmith (9 September 2013)

Julia said:


> No memory of how hopeless Turnbull was when he had his opportunity as Leader?



In terms of being a politician, that internet sensorship policy that emerged from one of his underlings two evenings before polling day wasn't exactly a positive.


----------



## So_Cynical (9 September 2013)

springhill said:


> Not a team player.




One of the election commentators pointed out the fact that MT lost the leadership by 1 vote and yet "put his sword away" and accepted the vote and didn't undermine Tony even though with a 1 vote margin he would be well within acceptable norms to do so.

And yet you claim he is not a team player...even though he clearly took one for the team.

----------------

Just no pleasing some people.


----------



## drsmith (9 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> One of the election commentators pointed out the fact that MT lost the leadership by 1 vote and yet "put his sword away" and accepted the vote and didn't undermine Tony even though with a 1 vote margin he would be well within acceptable norms to do so.
> 
> And yet you claim he is not a team player...even though he clearly took one for the team.



MT wasn't a team player until the beginning of this year. From that point, he's become more pragmatic about his prospects. 

He's a valuable asset to the Coalition if he can continue to play as part of the team, but he doesn't have the political acumen to be party leader.


----------



## springhill (9 September 2013)

So_Cynical said:


> One of the election commentators pointed out the fact that MT lost the leadership by 1 vote and yet "put his sword away" and accepted the vote and didn't undermine Tony even though with a 1 vote margin he would be well within acceptable norms to do so.
> 
> And yet you claim he is not a team player...even though he clearly took one for the team.
> 
> ...




You are obviously forgetting/ignoring his public popularity rating at the time.

You only see one aspect of the contest between Abbott/Turnbull, with that one eye of yours.

Sorry I circumvented the ignore list to view this post, won't make that mistake again.


----------



## Sean K (9 September 2013)

Julia said:


> You're not even going to be open minded enough to give Tony Abbott a go?
> No memory of how hopeless Turnbull was when he had his opportunity as Leader?
> What is it about Mr Turnbull which so inspires you?



Yes, sorry, I hope Tony develops into the role and becomes more statesman-like. 

I want a Prime Minister who does not embarrass us. That's all.

But, I'm more embarrassed that a motor sport enthusiast and a pro-gun moron look like they've been voted in. I'm vexed.


----------



## drsmith (9 September 2013)

kennas said:


> I hope Tony develops into the role and becomes more statesman-like.



He's gone from Mr unelectable to Prime Minister elect.

That's a good start.


----------



## sptrawler (9 September 2013)

kennas said:


> Yes, sorry, I hope Tony develops into the role and becomes more statesman-like.
> 
> I want a Prime Minister who does not embarrass us. That's all.
> 
> But, I'm more embarrassed that a motor sport enthusiast and a pro-gun moron look like they've been voted in. I'm vexed.




One thing everyone has to give Abbott credit for, is standing by his calls, even if they were unpopular.

He was put under extreme pressure and criticism by the government and the media, yet was proven correct on most calls.

He may not be zippy and with it, because he makes measured decisions, however it will make for a better government. 

It won't be as exciting as the Labor party reality tv show "Who wants to be a PM" . But I believe there has been a big sigh of relief from Australia.
Thank god it's over. IMO


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 August 2014)

I have been asked by some very nervous Liberal backbenchers to travel to Canberra next week to assist with a change in Liberal Party leadership. Malcolm is ready, willing and able.

As luck would have it, the ALP have also asked me to assist with removing John Robertson as Opposition Leader in that state. The NSW ALP in what is left of Sussex St. seem to have adopted a win-at-all-costs stance in NSW.

I will double up on fees for my lobbying duties.

I will leave the Arnage in for detailing in the morning and leave midweek. 

gg


----------



## drsmith (17 August 2014)

Malcolm's had a tendency to be a little too ready.

If the Libs were about to change leaders (which I don't think they are), I suspect Julie Bishop would get the nod.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/julie...appable-foreign-minister-20140815-104nca.html

In any case, the story of the budget measures has a long way to run yet.


----------



## banco (17 August 2014)

Not sure why everybody is so impressed by Julia Bishop.  Being Foreign Minister is quite different to having a messy domestic portfolio (Downer was a complete failure as party leader but a decent foreign minister).


----------



## IFocus (17 August 2014)

banco said:


> Not sure why everybody is so impressed by Julia Bishop.  Being Foreign Minister is quite different to having a messy domestic portfolio (Downer was a complete failure as party leader but a decent foreign minister).





Agree JB isnt that deep a person IMHO good at reciting lines but not much more better talent on the back bench.


----------



## noco (17 August 2014)

banco said:


> Not sure why everybody is so impressed by Julia Bishop.  Being Foreign Minister is quite different to having a messy domestic portfolio (Downer was a complete failure as party leader but a decent foreign minister).




Bob Carr was neither a good leader nor a good foreign Minister.....At least Julie Bishop has proved herself as a good foreign Minister ....just whether she could handle the mess the Green/Labor Socialist left wing maniacs left behind is something else....judgement should not be passed until she has the opportunity to has proved herself if and when...it is all hypothetical at the moment.

Turnbull is too far to the left and perhaps should be a part of the Labor Party and that is the main reason Labor would like to see Turnbull back in the top job........They just might be able to manipulate Turnbull a lot easier than they can Abbott.

I believe the newly formed Democratic Liberal Party lead by Senator David Leyonhjelm may one day rise to accommodate the center of politics.


----------



## sptrawler (17 August 2014)

drsmith said:


> Malcolm's had a tendency to be a little too ready.
> 
> If the Libs were about to change leaders (which I don't think they are), I suspect Julie Bishop would get the nod.
> 
> ...




Agree doc, the longer the blocking of the budget goes, the sillier the arguements are sounding.
The other day on ABC radio, the reporter kept asking Bill Shorten, what he would do to improve the fiscal situation.
He really couldn't answer the question.

All the puff has run out of bagging the budget and the fiscal situation keeps deteriorating.

Also read in the "Sunday Tmes' Hockey says the superannuation system is unaffordable.


----------



## drsmith (5 February 2015)

Malcolm Turnbull was up very early yesterday morning but it appears he's not the only one with the early moves.



The question is whether or not he has the political mongrel to match it with Labor. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foQJ95sAB54


----------



## drsmith (5 February 2015)

Malcolm Turnbull was up very early yesterday morning but it appears he's not the only one with the early moves.



The question is whether or not he now has the political mongrel to match it with Labor. He didn't when he was opposition leader. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foQJ95sAB54


----------



## SirRumpole (5 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> Malcolm Turnbull was up very early yesterday morning but it appears he's not the only one with the early moves.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Have you had an epiphany Doc ?

See you at the next Fabian meeting !


----------



## drsmith (5 February 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Have you had an epiphany Doc ?
> 
> See you at the next Fabian meeting !



No and no.

The prospect of the financial mismanagement, the carbon tax and the boats as would occur under a Labor/Green administration is not something I find any more appealing now than I did when they were in office. 

This is why the current government's difficulties are so disappointing. The political theatre though with these kind of things is as always entertaining but that's only a very small consolation with respect to the well being of the nation as a whole.


----------



## luutzu (8 February 2015)

If Turnbull or whoever gets into power like this, wouldn't it set (enhance) a bad precedent?

First, the voters does not really choose or decide who their Prime Minister is - the pollsters and media can provide convincing "evidence" of the PM's unpopularity and a coup is made.

I know our system is not that of the US's presidential politics... but I think most Australians go to the polls thinking they're also voting for who their PM is - not just their local rep.

Second... one opposition party is enough. To make it easy to replace Prime Ministership through opinion polls... wouldn't the second or third minister behind the PM not work with the PM but may even give bad advise and work against the party's and gov't interests so the PM be unpopular and be replaced before a proper general election?

BUt i guess the people's vote never really affect much at that level of power.


----------



## Tink (8 February 2015)

Well I don't support Turnbull. If I wanted to vote Labor, I would have.

The ABC should have been shredded long ago, who is running this country.


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2015)

The game's afoot,

First, Malcolm Turnbull this morning talking about the merits of time for elected party members to consult with the spill meeting on Tuesday,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-08/malcolm-turnbull-stops-his-morning-walk-to-speak/6078098

Then, TA in response bringing it forward to 9am Monday,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-...special-party-room-meeting-for-monday/6078002

We see here Malcolm's strength in oratory but also his weakness in political strategy.

He would have done better to have kept walking when he said he would.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> We see here Malcolm's strength in oratory but also his weakness in political strategy.
> 
> .




Or maybe giving Abbott more respect than the deserves


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> Or maybe giving Abbott more respect than the deserves



No.

Malcolm at the very least should have realised that Tony would not allow Labor to pick at the current wounds during Question Time on Monday. Not only that, he gave away that he wanted as much time as possible.

He should have said nothing.


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 February 2015)

luutzu said:


> I know our system is not that of the US's presidential politics... but I think most Australians go to the polls thinking they're also voting for who their PM is - not just their local rep.




+1

I doubt that a lot of people even know who their local member is. They go to vote Liberal, Labor, Green or whatever and just vote for whichever candidate has the word "Labor" (etc) next to their name. They're voting for the party, not their local member so far as their thinking is concerned.

I'm sure that if you asked 100 random people who they voted for in the last election them most would say "I voted for Tony Abbott" (etc) or "I voted Labor" (etc) and not "I voted for (insert name of local member here)".


----------



## So_Cynical (8 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> We see here Malcolm's strength in oratory but also his weakness in political strategy.
> 
> He would have done better to have kept walking when he said he would.




You guys are funny  you do want the LNP to win the next election - Right?

----------

Pure desperation and denial...he doesn't want to give them time to talk.
~
[video=youtube_share;qS6hrRdIn9k]http://youtu.be/qS6hrRdIn9k[/video]


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> You guys are funny  you do want the LNP to win the next election - Right?
> 
> ----------
> 
> ...



Keep up,

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29469&p=858368&viewfull=1#post858368


----------



## So_Cynical (8 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> Keep up,
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29469&p=858368&viewfull=1#post858368




You will have to forgive me for my lack of attention as im on holiday OS and not spending much time here.

I can see how a Bishop-Turnbull ticket would be somewhat more palatable to the red neck right, however its still clearly not the most electable option, the smartest guy in the room is Malcolm.


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 February 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> You guys are funny  you do want the *LNP* to win the next election - Right?




Something I've noticed recently is that the Coalition seems to have re-branded itself as the "LNP".

Can't say I'd ever heard that term until quite recently, it was always "the Coalition" or the Liberal Party / National Party. But all of a sudden the "LNP" term seems to have been universally adopted practically everywhere.

I take it that someone decided that "Liberal" and "the Coalition" are somewhat unpopular at the moment so is trying a re-branding?


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> You will have to forgive me for my lack of attention as im on holiday OS and not spending much time here.
> 
> I can see how a Bishop-Turnbull ticket would be somewhat more palatable to the red neck right, however its still clearly not the most electable option, the smartest guy in the room is Malcolm.



It seems now there's no such thing as a holiday when it comes to politics.

The expectation on the shoulders of a MT led government from the centre-left is that it will be able to implement a essential a Labor agenda without raising taxes and at the same time bring the budget to surplus. This is the political landscape into which MT will enter and manage should he becomes PM. This will not only require his intellect as a businessman and his fluent oratory but also his political intellect which was sadly lacking during his time as opposition leader. There's also the question about his political leadership and Nikki Sava had a bit to say about that from his time as opposition leader on Insiders this morning.

Malcolm though has had time to reflect and also take a leadership role in redrafting the NBN. TA clearly hasn't grown in leadership so in that sense Malcolm offers a greater hope than TA should he become PM. The additional step on the ladder as treasurer would in my view be a worthwhile step for Malcolm between where he is now and party leader to ensure his smarts are sufficiently broad but politics doesn't always afford that luxury.


----------



## Julia (8 February 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> I can see how a Bishop-Turnbull ticket would be somewhat more palatable to the red neck right, however its still clearly not the most electable option, the smartest guy in the room is Malcolm.



Smart?   Hardly.  He made a complete hash of his previous attempt to lead the party.  Have you forgotten the mess of the Godwin Grech affair?  Went off half cocked demanding the PM's resignation and ended up looking a complete fool.

Then he ignored the wishes of the majority of his party and went to bed with Labor over an ETS.  That was what finally saw him beaten by TA.

How is he going to go when attacked by Labor on the justifiable basis that in the past he has championed either a carbon tax or an ETS, yet now cannot support that position because the party wouldn't have a bar of it?

And how are the internal politics of the Coalition going to go when he wants gay marriage and the conservative Right regard that as their worst nightmare?
There is considerable irony in the fact that the two people bringing the spill motion are hard Right conservatives.
They seemed to assume the result would not include Mr Turnbull.

As drsmith has pointed out today, his political instinct seems to have improved little as he made public his desire for as much time as possible to shore up support before committing to challenging.  Even the fact that TA responded by moving the meeting forward to Monday will further exacerbate the tension and adverse effects of whatever the outcome is.  MT should have just shut up until after the result of the secret ballot.

It seems to me that many people are taking Mr Turnbull's urbane and articulate demeanour, his somewhat regal presence and well modulated voice, as being representative of political astuteness and capacity to fix all that is so deeply wrong with his party.  

However, just as the electorate largely declines to accept the reality of the need to pull in the fiscal horns, they might well equally be prepared to be deluded by charm.


----------



## banco (8 February 2015)

Why was it a bad choice for MT to highlight Abbott's decision to move the meeting? He's quietly highlighting Abbott's erratic "captain's picks".


----------



## So_Cynical (8 February 2015)

Julia said:


> Smart?   Hardly.  He made a complete hash of his previous attempt to lead the party.  Have you forgotten the mess of the Godwin Grech affair?  Went off half cocked demanding the PM's resignation and ended up looking a complete fool.
> 
> Then he ignored the wishes of the majority of his party and went to bed with Labor over an ETS.  That was what finally saw him beaten by TA.




Beaten by 1 vote.

My take is that TA was/is the better opposition leader and has clearly struggled with being PM and has failed to transition, while MT struggled with the opposition leadership he is much better suited to the top job, a job that in modern times has required intelligence, imagination and a willingness to deal.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 February 2015)

So_Cynical said:


> Beaten by 1 vote.
> 
> My take is that TA was/is the better opposition leader and has clearly struggled with being PM and has failed to transition, while MT struggled with the opposition leadership he is much better suited to the top job, a job that in modern times has required intelligence, imagination and a willingness to deal.




+1 here.

While I think that Malcolm has an enormous ego he has proved himself in the law and business and in politics as someone capable of bringing back the middle ground (leaving aside the Tea Party rednecks who are a splinter group but happen to control a lot of donations to the Liberal and National parties.)

Turnbull definitely bungled over the Godwin Gretch affair. Some may say he has done his time for that. John Howard had Minister after Minister resign or be suspended for something or other and then return after a period in the sin bin.

Compared to Turnbull's experience in the real world, what has Abbott got to offer ? He is a career politician with very little experience talking to real people. That's why I think he bungles so much. He is in a world of his own, a born to rule mentality with little communication ability. 

Turnbull had the guts to recognise the reality of AGW and tried to do something about it. This annoyed people who make money from burning coal and polluting the atmosphere. How will he handle the situation second time around ? 

I think he is smart enough to do things differently in the Climate Change area. Get the country onside to the point where the vested interests are marginalsed. As others have been saying, Tony Abbott is a goner, he's not up to the job and is an embarrassment. So why should the Libs wait any longer ?


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 February 2015)

Erratic thinking, captain's picks, unable to negotiate with others, a "born to rule" mentality, seeking absolute control over practically everything (closely related to the "captain's picks"), clinging to what worked in the past.

I worked for a boss just like that once (not with my current employer for the record). He was _exactly_ like that.

Took me and the rest of the staff quite a while to work it out amidst all the chaos. Eventually started reading about psychology and stumbled across something called "narcissism". Then it all made sense, oh yes it made sense in a big way. That was a real "light bulb moment". 

Watching the whole Abbott thing unfold reminds me of that experience all too well. It has followed the same overall course of events, albeit a bit more rapidly, and with much the same consequences. The Coalition, and Australia for that matter, is in an outright mess following this. Just what happened in that workplace - profit turned to loss, staff left, everything was in a mess.

My mind is open to whether Turnbull, Bishop or anyone else should be PM. But Tony's just got to go in my view and the sooner the better. His outlook and thinking just isn't suitable for PM, or even running a business for that matter. He's a salesman - good at closing the deal but of no use beyond that point when actual delivery is required.


----------



## Smurf1976 (8 February 2015)

SirRumpole said:


> I think he is smart enough to do things differently in the Climate Change area. Get the country onside to the point where the vested interests are marginalsed.




I don't trust him to keep the vested interests out there.

Suppose that we introduce an ETS. OK so far. But given Turnbull's background, can we trust him to keep the vested interests out of it? The last thing we need is a situation where we have an artificially created commodity and financial institutions making a killing through manipulating the price.


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2015)

Smurf1976 said:


> The last thing we need is a situation where we have an artificially created commodity and financial institutions making a killing through manipulating the price.



If we were part of a broader market based ETS, what difference would the PM of Australia make in relation to the trading price of carbon ?


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2015)

Julia said:


> Smart?   Hardly.  He made a complete hash of his previous attempt to lead the party.  Have you forgotten the mess of the Godwin Grech affair?  Went off half cocked demanding the PM's resignation and ended up looking a complete fool.
> 
> Then he ignored the wishes of the majority of his party and went to bed with Labor over an ETS.  That was what finally saw him beaten by TA.
> 
> ...



This is why I prefer Julie Bishop. Adding to that, she's been more measured in her commentary than Malcolm today.

Malcolm Turnbull as leader demonstrated his ability to divide the party, not unite it. If he was treasurer under Julie Bishop, that would take advantage of his natural talents and area of expertise. This is what I would regard as the best team arrangement going forward.


----------



## Julia (8 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> This is why I prefer Julie Bishop. Adding to that, she's been more measured in her commentary than Malcolm today.
> 
> Malcolm Turnbull as leader demonstrated his ability to divide the party, not unite it. If he was treasurer under Julie Bishop, that would take advantage of his natural talents and area of expertise. This is what I would regard as the best team arrangement going forward.



+1.
Mr Turnbull has shown no capacity to unite his party.  If they cannot unit after this fiasco they will be dead in the water for a very long time.


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2015)

One other advantage that Julie Bishop offers in a political sense is that she's a woman.

That in itself will give Labor something to think about.


----------



## banco (8 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> One other advantage that Julie Bishop offers in a political sense is that she's a woman.
> 
> That in itself will give Labor something to think about.




A barren, prada wearing, former asbestos company representing lawyer woman.  I'm sure the inevitable interviews with people dying of asbestos related diseases from James Hardies WA operations will really humanise her.


----------



## SirRumpole (8 February 2015)

drsmith said:


> One other advantage that Julie Bishop offers in a political sense is that she's a woman.
> 
> That in itself will give Labor something to think about.




It certainly will. Considering her current relationship with a property developer, her being PM will give Labor a chance to ask awkward questions about whether she did any deals with property developers in her days as a young and naive upcoming lawyer.

I can just see Shorten sharpening up for a revenge attack for the Bishop cross examination of Gillard in Question Time.

Oh the irony !


----------



## drsmith (8 February 2015)

banco said:


> A barren, prada wearing, former asbestos company representing lawyer woman.  I'm sure the inevitable interviews with people dying of asbestos related diseases from James Hardies WA operations will really humanise her.



I rest my case.


----------



## IFocus (9 February 2015)

Interesting how most here forget Abbott gave Turnbul the poison chalice and orders to destroy the NBN................remember that beauty?

Turnbul actually moved the coalition to accepting a more sensible position of having  some NBN and no doubt down the road we will eventually see a closer complete NBN under various governments all be it X 10 the cost it could have taken.

But regardless the front bench are out and out losers and 2nd rate retards from Howards reign,  I am sure Shorten is backing Abbott and Peta to stay then all he has to do is just turn up and win an election.


----------



## Tisme (10 February 2015)

My spies tell me it's game on ......... I still don't think he has the ticker though.

Oh anyone know someone who wants to be a a) Treasurer or b)Head of PM dept?


----------



## dutchie (10 February 2015)

Tisme said:


> My spies tell me it's game on ......... I still don't think he has the ticker though.
> 
> Oh anyone know someone who wants to be a a) Treasurer or b)Head of PM dept?




My spies tell me that the " game on " theme is driven solely by the media.

Sensationalism sells.


----------



## Tisme (10 February 2015)

dutchie said:


> My spies tell me that the " game on " theme is driven solely by the media.
> 
> Sensationalism sells.




I'm sure the media have a role, but ultimately it's the players who decide what happens. Putting Rupert offside is not a good idea though.


----------



## banco (10 February 2015)

dutchie said:


> My spies tell me that the " game on " theme is driven solely by the media.
> 
> Sensationalism sells.




Yeah the media is responsible for Tony's dire poll numbers and his inept "captain's picks" :shake:


----------



## dutchie (10 February 2015)

banco said:


> Yeah the media is responsible for Tony's dire poll numbers and his inept "captain's picks" :shake:




Well you could be right,  but I think it's more self inflicted.


----------



## basilio (10 February 2015)

Have to say that Malcolm Turnbulls demand that politicians stand up against shock jocks was a breath of fresh air. Obviously he is practically the only Liberal politician to refuse to be bullied by Alan Jones so he is speaking from truth.

I wonder how it makes the rest of the party feel ?


> * Malcolm Turnbull: politicians must resist being 'bullied' by likes of Alan Jones
> *
> A day after failed spill motion, communications minister says politicians should stand up for beliefs and ‘not be bullied into an echo chamber’ by the media
> 
> ...




http://www.theguardian.com/australi...politicians-must-resist-being-bullied-by-like


----------



## basilio (10 February 2015)

Apparently  Bill Shorten had a real go at Malcolm Turnball in parliament today on his decision to enter politics.


> "Should I go Labor, should I go Liberal...that is the question!" And on deciding John Howard had the best chance of winning the election goes Liberal and his seat of Wentworth goes Liberal. So what is really at the core of the man? I would suggest just personal ambition, having such confidence in his own intelligence that it will transcend everything. Another narcissist that will do anything for power?


----------



## banco (10 February 2015)

I don't think Shorten of all people is in a position to call anybody else  an a narcissistic opportunist.


----------



## noco (1 March 2015)

*Say NO to Malcolm Turnbull becoming leader of the Liberal party....He is a wolf in sheep's clothing. 
*
01 March 2015
Dear Fellow Australians,
Foreword: I wish to acknowledge and thank Moira Kirkwood of Endeavour Forum for providing much of the information in this e-mail.

________________________________________

Although OzUnited attempts to remain ABOVE politics, sometimes an issue arises that is so urgently serious that break the rule is justified.
Recent indications are that Malcolm Turnbull may try and grab the leadership from Tony Abbott on Tuesday.
I will explain how, in just 5 minutes or even less you can urgently e-mail every Federal Liberal politicians to NOT support Turnbull. 
If we ALL do that, it WILL make a big difference to maintaining stability in Canberra.
But first we need to check that you properly understand how seriously bad news Malcolm Turnbull is.
Just yesterday Andrew Bolt of the Herald-Sun quite accurately described Turnbull as a 'snake'. 
I'd say a well-oiled snake, so unctuiously urbane he is. His 'smooth-talking' alone fools a LOT of people into not realising what he is.
Malcolm Turnbull has for a long time been sneakily and determinedly undermining Tony Abbott - literally from the moment the Liberals were elected. 
Remember,  some months ago, he already tried to 'have a go' at the leadership position and have Tony Abbott booted. He was completely rebuffed by a large majority.
But Tony Abbott has made some serious mistakes, no question. And Turnbull wants to strike again - at the very moment when STABILITY is vital!
Turnbull believes he is 'destined' to lead. His ambition to be Prime Minister far outweighs his willingness to put Australia first.
He is a very good 'manipulator' - something that actually is desirable in a Prime Minister. But ONLY in a conservative and very moral P.M.
Being a leftist/socialist, Turnbull's 'charismatic' manipulation skills make him VERY dangerous to our nation's well-being. Probably more so than even Rudd was.
Malcolm Turnbull is as leftist as any Labor politician. 
He supported Gillard's carbon tax, he supports homosexual 'marriage,' he immorally (and even treasonously) helped a British ex-secret service agent betray Britian by materially assisting in getting the man's book published - a book giving away Britian's national secrets to enemies of the West.

Most recently, Turnbull has been supportive of Gillian Triggs, the woman who has been trying to wreck the Abbott government's successful 'stopping the boats' program.
You can get details about Turnbull's support for Labor and other nefarious actions HERE.
But in a nutshell, if he is given control of the Liberal Party, then there will be ZERO difference between Labor and Liberal. As you know, there is already far too much that the two parties have in common. 
Imagine if they had no differences whatsoever.  Australia would be under the control of  true socialist dictatorship!
If you don't know that Turnbull is very bad news and you haven't got the time to do your own research, then ... well... you need to simply trust me on this because the matter is urgent and we all need to be loudly heard right now.
To take just 5 minutes and send an e-mail to every Federal Liberal Politician, use the automated bulk-e-mailing facility provided by The Australian Family Association. It sends a 'personalised' e-mail to every politician of your choosing.
The link is below; here is how to use the facility:
When you are on that page, scroll down to Email Members of Parliament and click that box.
Make sure there is a tick in the box for Federal House of Representatives, and click the round radio button for  Show parties.
Then tick Liberal Party and make sure all other parties' boxes are NOT ticked.
At this point all the Federal Liberal Party M.P.'s names should appear with ticks in the box by their names. That confirms that they will receive your email. You can add or remove ticks by clicking inside the respective box.
In the subject line of your e-mail write: Please do NOT support Malcolm Turnbull - put Australia first! 
If everyone sends the same message, then that will have the most impact.
According to Andrew Bolt,  Tuesday is the deadline for Turnbull to try and grab power.
So PLEASE do this right now... (click HERE  [ http://www.family.org.au/component/elookup/?task=selectEmailPoliticians&Itemid=487 ] to start the process - it's really easy and quick!) 
... for Australia's sake.


Fellow Australians, surely no explanation - to intelligent and properly-informed people - is needed as to why it is CRITICAL that our Call for a Royal Commission attracts huge support across the land.  

To succeed, we need as many people as possible to know about and support The Call.

 Therefore I ask and remind all concerned to .....

......   please make every possible effort in spreading the word.


________________________________________


----------



## banco (1 March 2015)

Noco it would explain a lot if you get your views from these crackpot chain emails.


----------



## noco (1 March 2015)

banco said:


> Noco it would explain a lot if you get your views from these crackpot chain emails.




Banco, it explains a lot to me that you would to see the lefty Turnbull as the new Liberal Party leader....He would be so close to the Green/Labor left wing socialist party.


----------



## Bintang (1 March 2015)

noco said:


> But in a nutshell, if he is given control of the Liberal Party, then there will be ZERO difference between Labor and Liberal. As you know, there is already far too much that the two parties have in common.
> Imagine if they had no differences whatsoever. Australia would be under the control of true socialist dictatorship!




If the Liberal party doesn’t get its act together one way or another Australia will be back under control of the socialist dictators anyway after the next election.

Whilst I would rather that this whole leadership issue would just go away (which could happen if the media started reporting some real news instead of make-believe news) if there must be a change of leadership and if it goes to Turnbull, then at least Australia would be under the control of a Liberal socialist dictator rather than a Labor socialist dictator. The latter would himself be  under the control of the Unions.

_PS: Does anyone know the difference between 'socialist dictatorship' and 'true socialist dictatorship'?_


----------



## noco (1 March 2015)

Bintang said:


> If the Liberal party doesn’t get its act together one way or another Australia will be back under control of the socialist dictators anyway after the next election.
> 
> Whilst I would rather that this whole leadership issue would just go away (which could happen if the media started reporting some real news instead of make-believe news) if there must be a change of leadership and if it goes to Turnbull, then at least Australia would be under the control of a Liberal socialist dictator rather than a Labor socialist dictator. The latter would himself be  under the control of the Unions.
> 
> _PS: Does anyone know the difference between 'socialist dictatorship' and 'true socialist dictatorship'?_




Turnbull panicked when he saw the last weeks poll which favored Tony Abbott and the Liberal party...there will be new poll out tomorrow.


----------



## Caveman (12 March 2015)

noco said:


> there will be new poll out tomorrow.



I cant`t wait.


----------



## Tisme (14 September 2018)

Stage 1:



Stage 2:


----------



## dutchie (15 September 2018)

I think Malcolm could be PM again.
All he has to do is join the Labor Party,  shove Shorten to the back bench (should not be too hard considering how many Labor members dislike him (Shorten)).

Now then, where can Malcolm find a safe Labor seat.........


----------



## Knobby22 (16 September 2018)

dutchie said:


> I think Malcolm could be PM again.
> All he has to do is join the Labor Party,  shove Shorten to the back bench (should not be too hard considering how many Labor members dislike him (Shorten)).
> 
> Now then, where can Malcolm find a safe Labor seat.........



He was a merchant banker. Sure he was in touch with the Liberal vote and agreed with them on social issues unlike Abbott but he is a capitalist through and through. Not a union member but didn't suck up to Murdoch so got hate press. Forget it.


----------



## Darc Knight (16 September 2018)

Sounds like Lucy Turnbull had too much input. Malcy using her to gauge the female vote or something.
Maybe that's just an excuse now, who knows.


----------



## Knobby22 (16 September 2018)

Excuse? Being in touch with the electorate? Now we have no policy to reduce energy costs. Slo Mo hasn't even got a reason to hold Parliament as there are no policies being brought forward. They have stopped governing.


----------



## sptrawler (16 September 2018)

Knobby, he will probably get the napkin out this weekend, and work out a policy, that seems to suit Aussies better.
We obviously enjoy shoot from the hip politics.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 September 2018)

I just hope this government goes soon.

I don't think the country deserves even another 6 months of this clueless rabble.


----------



## dutchie (19 September 2018)

SirRumpole said:


> I just hope this government goes soon.
> 
> I don't think the country deserves even another 6 months of this clueless rabble.



You could say the same sentence the day after the next election.


----------



## Knobby22 (19 September 2018)

dutchie said:


> You could say the same sentence the day after the next election.



Murdoch can be thanked for that.


----------



## PZ99 (19 September 2018)

Knobby22 said:


> Murdoch can be thanked for that.



You're not wrong. In one way it's ironic how Turnbull got his wish for Australia to be a republic. 

Not sure he was ready for Murdoch to be the head of state though...


----------



## bigdog (10 March 2019)




----------



## sptrawler (10 March 2019)

Yes Bigdog, if there is one good thing to come out of all this, it is to see the great pretender walk.IMO


----------

