# Who are you voting for in the Federal election?



## numbercruncher (12 September 2007)

Aussiejeff being one of the smarter amoungst us made this comment in the other election thread ...

"It would be interesting to see how this threads "old" poll results would shape up if it started from today.... most votes were cast some time ago and of course, you can't revote!"


Very good point Jeff, so ive started another one as alot has happened since that thread was started and people change there minds !


----------



## robots (12 September 2007)

*Re: Who are you Voting for in the Federal Election ??*

hello,

liBeRal pArTy - jOhN hOwArD

thankyou

robots


----------



## insider (12 September 2007)

Libs because I say no to cheap chinese imports


----------



## numbercruncher (12 September 2007)

Hello Robots,


Thats cute, you wrote his name the same shape as his Eyebrows !!



http://kevin07.com.au/


Go Ruddmeister - Advance Australia Fair !


----------



## numbercruncher (12 September 2007)

insider said:


> Libs because I say no to cheap chinese imports




But youd be ok with Expensive ones?


----------



## BIG BWACULL (12 September 2007)

insider said:


> Libs because I say no to cheap chinese imports



In that case i'll go Labour so my AGF Fund will prosper


----------



## insider (12 September 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> But youd be ok with Expensive ones?




Cheap imports will stuff my families business up... Wait a sec... It already has


----------



## numbercruncher (12 September 2007)

insider said:


> Cheap imports will stuff my families business up... Wait a sec... It already has





Sorry to hear that @ But it can hardly be blamed on one single political party can it ?

Your family are in the Jewlery game i remember you saying ? Surely quality Jewelery would eat the cheap chinese stuff ?


----------



## doctorj (12 September 2007)

I'm surprised to find I'm the only fence sitter at the moment.

I'd normally consider myself on the left, but the idea of an opposition party rolling back the reforms of the government when they get to power makes me nervous.


----------



## Julia (12 September 2007)

doctorj said:


> I'd normally consider myself on the left, but the idea of an opposition party rolling back the reforms of the government when they get to power makes me nervous.




That's one of my concerns also, Doctorj.  Also just the complete inexperience of the whole Labor team.


----------



## nioka (12 September 2007)

insider said:


> Libs because I say no to cheap chinese imports




Isn't it the libs that gave us the cheap Chinese imports. As for voting, Vote for an independant first if there is one worth voting for, particularly in the Senate. Put the sitting member LAST, that will give them a message and try to get new faces.


----------



## explod (12 September 2007)

Julia said:


> That's one of my concerns also, Doctorj.  Also just the complete inexperience of the whole Labor team.




Everyone and thing has to start somewhere.   

Steve Bracks had only been in Parliament a short time when he took over from Kennet and did well

John F Kennedy was regarded as young and wet behind the ears when he became US President and in his short time history says he did very well

Chip Good year came from nowhere to BHP and wow, solid family backgound in the industry of course.

Look at what Hitler mustered up and he gave the appearance of mad from the beginning but his war machine almost took control of the lot at one stage.

Rudd, well some say that he was a major force behind Bettie in the early years.

Politics is like the stock market, there has to be ups and downs and there has to be change and there will be.

On relations between our near nabour trading partners which for national security and trade are vitally important I think a blind horse could do as well as what Johnney has been up to lately


----------



## Duckman#72 (12 September 2007)

Julia said:


> Also just the complete inexperience of the whole Labor team.




The "whole Labor Team"? 

Full marks go to Labor for keeping it together this far. This time last year Wayne Swan couldn't stomach Kevin Rudd who in turn couldn't stand Julia Gillard!! It's amazing what a sniff of a political victory will do.

But at the moment it's better the Devils I know. 

Julia Gillard on Lateline tonight was a joke as usual. I loved the argument that it was OK for Steve Bracks and Peter Beattie to go to an election, ask for a full term and then retire one third the way through - yet John Howard is fooling the Australian people by advising them upfront that he will retire late into the next term. 

At least tonight Julia spoke about something she and the Labor party are *extremely experienced about*. I just loved the comment about how much time will be spent by the Coalition on leadership issues and how it takes away from the real role of Government. It was priceless.....pure gold. And she delivered the line without any hint of irony or tongue in cheek. Over the past 11 years the Labor Party has had 4 different leaders, countless factional fighting, disasterous leadership coups and an imploded Opposition Leader that will never have portrait hanging on the wall of with other "Labor Greats".....and yet Julia is concerned about the time the Coalition will be spending on "leadership".     

All I can say is - Kevin..... keep Julia on the box. She's one of the best assets Johnny has......and I love her... "Thaaanks foorr having moii Toe-neee". I think she is subconsciously turning into "Prue" from Kath and Kim


----------



## doctorj (12 September 2007)

Duckman#72 said:


> All I can say is - Kevin..... keep Julia on the box. She's one of the best assets Johnny has......and I love her... "Thaaanks foorr having moii Toe-neee". I think she is subconsciously turning into "Prue" from Kath and Kim



She's one of the other reasons I'm unsure.  Can't stand her!


----------



## moxy (13 September 2007)

Little John's demise has been a beautiful thing to watch over the last couple of months...


----------



## insider (13 September 2007)

Hey Number Cruncher yes but you'd also be surprised at the quality you can get... But you can't blame a party for the flood of cheap imports... Our world is getting smaller by the day so it was bound to happen... I've decided to vote for Pedro instead


----------



## Aussiejeff (13 September 2007)

Gee. Given that Mr Howard has just announced in the media that if re-elected he will retire sometime in his next term and "hand over the reins" to his best buddy Peter Costello, are all the Howard supporters now feeling just a _teensy_ bit of unease about that prospect?

Given this announcement, I will be MOST surprised if the polls for the Liberals over the coming weeks get any better than the last few *horror* ones. I predict that they will in fact get far worse.... I also sense that the Howard Camp is not receiving much favorable press reaction ATM across the mainstream media outlets either. Most of the news is negative.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain that a slew of previous polls have indicated that less than 20% of voters thought Peter Costello would be their preferred PM. Honestly, I can't see Howard's now-silenced *glove puppet* making any more impression between now and the looming election/wipeout (cross off according to whichever party you support). I wonder how the inevitable polls of Costello vs Rudd will pan out?

Interestink, verrrry interestink few weeks ahead....


AJ


----------



## numbercruncher (15 September 2007)

Isnt it a scary thought, if the Liberals win again, this Muppet is the next Prime minister.


----------



## numbercruncher (15 September 2007)

> JOHN Howard's decision to hand the reins to Peter Costello during a fifth term in office would not have impressed undecided voters, who do not want the Treasurer to lead the country, exclusive polling for The Age shows.
> 
> Although undecided voters in key marginal electorates in Melbourne and Sydney believe Mr Howard's time is up, they appear unhappy at the prospect of Mr Costello as PM, labelling him "sinister", "arrogant" and "treacherous".




http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/swingers-cool-on-costello-as-pm/2007/09/14/1189276987686.html


----------



## numbercruncher (15 September 2007)

Just check this smooth operator out why dont you ....

Cute Button nose

Thin wavy hair

Firm round buttocks erm i mean cheeks

(Ive really got to stop watching Shrek i think)

But seriously this champion of the people is sure to deliver an Australia we all want.

Better than the other teams plan whatever that maybe? Perhaps liberating the middle east and providing Oil security or something?


----------



## Duckman#72 (15 September 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/swingers-cool-on-costello-as-pm/2007/09/14/1189276987686.html




Considering this second poll was established to give a clearer intention of voting patterns and has now been up for over three days and covers the "very unpopular" handover to Mr Costello - the air doesn't appear to smell of a wild breathtaking sweep of power to Labor as the media would like you to think.  

From where I sit in Qld - I'm just not seeing the underlying shift from the Coalition. You can have big swings all you like in seats of no importance but Labor still needs the big change of seats in Qld.


----------



## Duckman#72 (15 September 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> View attachment 13170
> 
> 
> But seriously this champion of the people is sure to deliver an Australia we all want.
> ...




I reckon Darryl Kerrigan would call Kevin - a real "ideas" man.....just like his son Steve. Both really nice blokes I'm sure......but not for PM thanks.

But seriously, Kevin is certainly bringing his strengths to the top job. Red Tape.  I hear today that he has announced the formation of yet another committee - this one will report to the Government on where the real skills shortages are. 

I would suggest if Labor gets in - the most serious skills shortage will be getting enough people to fill the positions for all the management committees, government inquries, steering committees, reporting departments and advisory sections that Kevin has announced over the past 6 months.   

He sure is an "ideas man". Unfortunately to borrow from a journalist in The Australian during the week - He prefers sound bite over sound policy. 

Duckman


----------



## numbercruncher (15 September 2007)

So as a Queenslander how do you feel about the virtual Guarantee by Johnny to supply you with a bunch of Nuclear reactors?


----------



## Aussiejeff (16 September 2007)

Duckman#72 said:


> Considering this second poll was established to give a clearer intention of voting patterns and has now been up for over three days and covers the "very unpopular" handover to Mr Costello - the air doesn't appear to smell of a wild breathtaking sweep of power to Labor as the media would like you to think.
> 
> From where I sit in Qld - I'm just not seeing the underlying shift from the Coalition. You can have big swings all you like in seats of no importance but Labor still needs the big change of seats in Qld.




Hmmm. I suspect this forum would be represented by only a very small minority of young, poorer folk , shift workers, service industry workers or other "typical" labor supporters from blue collar backgrounds or unions amongst it's members. I bet most labour supporters in here would be "middle class, tending to middle-aged, swinging voters". 

So, In a way I'm not surprised the two polls in this forum have so far disagreed with what the "general community" polls might be showing.

Interestink, nevertheless.

JC


----------



## numbercruncher (16 September 2007)

I wouldnt be surprised If Johnny "big brows" Howard calls the Election during school holidays in the hope that familys on Holiday will forget to vote.


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 September 2007)

Interesting to look back on Johnny Howard's career...

this one from 2004. much still relevant
handing over leadership etc 
should JH have handed over to PC - 
when - is it too late etc . 
these and many other questions folks will be answered in the next few months lol

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/03/16/1079199221432.html?from=storyrhs



> Can John Howard ignore the siren song of power?
> March 17, 2004
> The Howard doubters are out again, and he's determined to prove them wrong again, writes Paul Strangio.
> 
> ...




As I said this was written in 2004
and he went on to win then
will he do it again ? lol


----------



## Julia (16 September 2007)

The following is an item from the "Courier Mail" 15-16 September.

"ALP a Union of Unionists"

Anna Bligh's friend Greg Combet will be one of three former ACTU presidents in Parliament if he wins the Hunter Valley seat of Charlton at the federal election.

With Kevin Rudd cruising to victory his cabinet will be dominated by former union heavyweights and party hacks including
Julia Gillard (AUS president)
Wayne Swan (former ALP state secretary)
Joe Ludwig (AWU)
Arch Bevis (QTU)
Simon Crean (ACTU president)
Martin Ferguson (ACTU president)
Lindsay Tanner (FCU)
Anthony Albanese (former asst. gen. secretary NSW ALP)
Tanya Plibersek (student union official)
Tony Burk (SDAEU)
Chris Evans (MWU)
Alan Griffin (FCU)
Kerry O'Brien (MWU)
Nick Sherry (FLATU)
Kate Lundy (CFMEU)

Unionists contesting seats in the federal election are
Doug Cameron (AMWU)
Bill Shorten (AWU)
Richard Marles (TWU).

Rudd insists unionists won't exert too much influence.
Of course not."
_____________________________________________

I hadn't realised quite the extent of the union domination of the ALP
until I read the above and find it pretty unnerving.

Also agree with Duckman's comments about the inevitable proliferation of committees, enquiries etc under Kevin Rudd, most of which will cost us many dollars and provide little outcome.

The way John Howard is looking at present, I'd welcome a switch to Costello. Never thought I'd say that!


----------



## BIG BWACULL (16 September 2007)

Cmon guys only three more votes and its KEVIN07  lol
Time for a new beginning instead of the same OLD ****


----------



## Whiskers (16 September 2007)

BIG BWACULL said:


> Cmon guys only three more votes and its KEVIN07  lol
> Time for a new beginning instead of the same OLD ****




There ya go BIG BWACULL, I'll give him one for ya. :


----------



## Whiskers (16 September 2007)

Julia said:


> Also agree with Duckman's comments about the inevitable proliferation of committees, enquiries etc under Kevin Rudd, most of which will cost us many dollars and provide little outcome.




C'mon guy's committees aren't that expensive.  

If he starts talking too many judicial enquiries and royal commissions, then I might start thinking expensive.


----------



## Duckman#72 (16 September 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> So as a Queenslander how do you feel about the virtual Guarantee by Johnny to supply you with a bunch of Nuclear reactors ?




Hi Cruncher

It really is of no concern to me in this upcoming election.

The "*virtual guarantee* of a bunch of nuclear reactors" is a classic case of "the sky is falling" election scaremongering.

I would much prefer to vote Coalition for its policies and economic management rather than take up those of Labor. To me the nuclear debate isn't an important election issue. (And if you were really concerned about nuclear power you shouldn't be entertaining voting Labor's either given they are happy shipping it all over the world - or is that OK, just not near your place?)

Certainly I am not without understanding views on climate change, greenhouse emissions, nuclear energy - but I won't be railroaded into change at any cost.

Duckman


----------



## numbercruncher (16 September 2007)

Duckman#72 said:


> Hi Cruncher
> 
> 
> The "*virtual guarantee* of a bunch of nuclear reactors" is a classic case of "the sky is falling" election scaremongering.





Hi Duckman,


Why then are you as the tax payer providing perfectly good money towards Australia's participation in the Generation IV advanced nuclear reactor research program if its just scaremongering ?

And did you know that Johnny monobrow now has the United States backing to join the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) and membership of the GNEP could force Australia to establish uranium enrichment plants and accept the world's nuclear waste – on top of the 25 nuclear reactors that Johnny already wants to build.


Not the Australia i want im afraid.


----------



## wayneL (16 September 2007)

Interesting how things have evened up since the last poll... particularly from the beginning of the last poll which was wildly pro-Labor.

A small sample still, but I think it shows this election may be tighter than many think it will be. Plenty of mud sticking to both sides now to make it really interesting.

I'd bet there are many like me. If asked right now if I'd vote Laboral or Libor, I'd say one thing, but might not actually carry it out when it comes down to it.


----------



## Duckman#72 (16 September 2007)

Julia said:


> The following is an item from the "Courier Mail" 15-16 September.
> 
> "ALP a Union of Unionists"
> 
> ...




Hi Julia

I just received a flyer in our letterbox today about a "Community and Family Fun Day" at the local park.....3pm till late......free amusement rides, fairy floss, ice-creams, sausage sizzle, bar operating between 6pm and 11pm with live band playing .........and you get to meet the local Labor Candidate. 

All proudly sponsored and paid for by the CFMEU.  

You can smell the Unions ever increasing desperation to get Labor re-elected........and the desperation gives me cause for concern. Will Big Kev be able to keep them under control? Yeah right!! 

Whiskers - the problem I have about all the committees that Kevin has established, does not relate to the waste of money (although there is that). My problem is that just by announcing all these enquiries and establishing all these committees - nothing is actually getting fixed. It looks great on the 6:00 news, "Kevin Rudd is to get tough on grocery prices", "Kevin Rudd will look into petrol price discrepancies" etc etc etc. The media lap it up, the voters lap it up and Kev looks like the messiah. Setting up a "committee to investigate" is a type of poor mans policy. A stop gap designed to plug a problem - and there are a heap of stop gaps required in Labor's policies. 

Regards
Duckman


----------



## explod (16 September 2007)

Duckman#72 said:


> Hi Julia
> 
> I just received a flyer in our letterbox today about a "Community and Family Fun Day" at the local park.....3pm till late......free amusement rides, fairy floss, ice-creams, sausage sizzle, bar operating between 6pm and 11pm with live band playing .........and you get to meet the local Labor Candidate.
> 
> ...




Tonight on prime time TV the number of Commonwealth Government Community announcements just amazes.  The cost must be astronomical and is coming out of the taxpayers pool.  And the messages are blatant ramping of Liberal Party Policies for the coming election.   Yes we have the unions but it is more than offset by the  blatant waste of Little Johnny and his team.

And in ballance with Kevin, Johnny picks a remote hospital to help at the last minute,  going to solve the indigenous problem at the last minute, suddenly concerned about the environment at the last minute.  After 9 years the big stuff now at the last minute.  Johnny has proven he wont follow through, Kevin has not, so is worth a try


----------



## Duckman#72 (16 September 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> Hi Duckman,
> 
> 
> Why then are you as the tax payer providing perfectly good money towards Australia's participation in the Generation IV advanced nuclear reactor research program if its just scaremongering ?
> ...




Hi Cruncher

I said that the comment "virtually guarantees a bunch of nuclear reactors in Queensland" was scaremongering. And I stick by that. You're talking about something completely different.    

I completely agree in researching nuclear energy and the role it could play in Australia's future. But it doesn't mean I'm voting for nuclear reactors in *this election *. One vote doesn't have to lead to the other.

You have demonstrated my point precisely - just because the Coalition is discussing the idea of nuclear energy, opponents already have a dozen reactors built (most of them near your backyard).

Duckman


----------



## Rafa (16 September 2007)

from my point of view, rather labor only annouce intentions rather than detailed policy... plenty of time for that...

not point giving the libs ideas, and then allow them, by virtue of incumbency, to make an half arsed attempts to copy them... (eg the education edowment and the OPEL bush broadband policies... both useless policies simply cause the libs had to show they were doing something about education and broadband... but absolute crap outcomes.

from what i have read, howard in 1996 did the same... i.e no substance....
thats smart politics.

as for the unions, well hawke was ex union, but he started the dismatling of the union movement... Unions taking over the country is as much a scare campaign as nuclear reactors in duckmans backyard!


but heck, alls fair in politics...


----------



## mexican (16 September 2007)

Julia said:


> The following is an item from the "Courier Mail" 15-16 September.
> 
> "ALP a Union of Unionists"
> 
> ...




Seems like the PM's Work choice ad's are working!
Remember the unions and ACTU are the one's who got employees working conditions that they  enjoy today, ie: leave loading, penalty rates, 4 weeks ann leave and so on. 
Not really that evil as the PM would like us to think, as we all have at one stage been a employee or still are.
Unions got carried away with the power they had and explioted it and now it is going in the other direction with some employers with the new Work choice laws.
As my young nephews are finding out!


----------



## moxy (16 September 2007)

It won't be a "tight" election...far from it. Its called an humiliating LANDSLIDE swing to labor. As if you can call it tight from this bl**dy forum poll, HAHA!!!.


----------



## wayneL (17 September 2007)

moxy said:


> It won't be a "tight" election...far from it. Its called an humiliating LANDSLIDE swing to labor. As if you can call it tight from this bl**dy forum poll, HAHA!!!.



(sigh) Another know it all carper. 

Look, you may be right, it could be a landslide. But things generally tighten up as elections approach in Australia. Frankly, the libs deserve to lose IMNSHO (and I'm traditionally a lib voter).

I'm just saying it might be closer than is seem right now. Just an opinion, if yours differs, fine, state it, but don't be a tosser.


----------



## Whiskers (17 September 2007)

Duckman#72 said:


> Whiskers - the problem I have about all the committees that Kevin has established, does not relate to the waste of money (although there is that). My problem is that just by announcing all these enquiries and establishing all these committees - nothing is actually getting fixed. It looks great on the 6:00 news, "Kevin Rudd is to get tough on grocery prices", "Kevin Rudd will look into petrol price discrepancies" etc etc etc. The media lap it up, the voters lap it up and Kev looks like the messiah. Setting up a "committee to investigate" is a type of poor mans policy. A stop gap designed to plug a problem - and there are a heap of stop gaps required in Labor's policies.
> 
> Regards
> Duckman




Hi Duckman

Well, if you don't have a committee to consider things, what are the options?

Busines does not invest in 'ideas' ad hoc. They engage committees and consultants etc to research, test, trial, get feedback, do budgets etc before making a decision to develop a major project or make big changes to proceedures. 

One option that many Queenslders don't like is the Beattie style of forcing the leaders view on his own cabinet and the electorate... akin to a dictatorship.

On the weekend I saw somewhere on the TV about the downside of multitasking. Apparently Microsoft were one of the first to adopt multitasking, but their research has now found that it leads to too much loss of productivity. 

The industry and community organisations that I have been involved in all have committees or representatives to delegate leg work functions too and report back to the leadership for decision making.

Provided the committee hearings and results are open to the public, then I believe it makes for more transparent and effective government.

You may need to clarify what you mean by 'poor mans policy'. I would have thought that not having committees to properly investigate issues and changes was a poor mans policy... at least in the sense that you may not make the best decisions based on all the options eg Work Choices, Iraq.


----------



## chops_a_must (17 September 2007)

Aussiejeff said:


> Hmmm. I suspect this forum would be represented by only a very small minority of young, poorer folk , shift workers, service industry workers or other "typical" labor supporters from blue collar backgrounds or unions amongst it's members. I bet most labour supporters in here would be "middle class, tending to middle-aged, swinging voters".
> 
> So, In a way I'm not surprised the two polls in this forum have so far disagreed with what the "general community" polls might be showing.
> 
> ...



Well, I'm definitely not middle aged. Nor am I really a Labor supporter.

But if you are young, have a wordly awareness, care about education and not entirely self-interested, I just can't see how on earth you could actually vote for the "Liberals".


Julia said:


> Tanya Plibersek (student union official)



Ahahahahahaha! I'm sorry, I didn't realise counselling students and giving them advice on Centrelink options was such a crime! It just appears we are no longer allowed to care for the industry we are working in, nor are we allowed to care for the fellow workers in that industry.

And while we are on union bashing, why don't we get rid of the most powerful  and saturated union workforce of all? You know the one I am talking about... the police? Why aren't people prepared to take them on?

And in all seriousness, what's the difference between a union... and an association? I'm a member of my industry's largest association. We lobby for legislative changes, protect members, have workshops, training days, public information campaigns etc etc. Everything a union should do. So why not get rid of it? Why not get rid of the AMA as they are also effectively a union. Why not? They are an overtly political body.


But a final point I want to make, and most important. I met a student teacher the other night, who had been sacked from their place of work... because of going on prac. He was given an ultimatum, either go on prac and be sacked, or don't and keep your job.

Now, under work"choices", this is totally legal and acceptable. So... which one of you Liberal supporters here can defend the application of these laws in this instance. Someone who has taken a scholarship to go bush, to help your kids, someone who is going to give up a significant chunk of their lives to help out YOUR kids, gets sacked for doing so. What kind of society says that that is not important? What kind of society would allow the sacking of a worker, for trying to enter a workforce grossly understaffed? What kind of society says it is now ok to be sacked for becoming a teacher? Can one of the cheer squad here tell me how we are meant to have a functioning society when this sort of thing is happening, and is obviously happening a lot?

As the saying goes, if you tolerate this your children will be next.

"The future teaches you to be alone
The present to be afraid and cold
So if I can shoot rabbits
Then I can shoot fascists

Bullets for your brain today
But we'll forget it all again
Monuments put from pen to paper
Turns me into a gutless wonder

And if you tolerate this
Then your children will be next
And if you tolerate this
Then your children will be next"


----------



## 2020hindsight (17 September 2007)

If Labour are defying gravity in the polls, 
 then I don't see how you can have a landslide
because  - don't you need gravity to have a landslide ?


----------



## Aussiejeff (17 September 2007)

From AAP this morning...

_"September 17, 2007 07:50am
YET another poll has given Labor a potentially election-winning lead.

The poll, conducted by Nexus Research over the weekend, found 51 per cent of 600 respondents in Sydney and Melbourne would vote Labor while 36 per cent would vote Liberal. 

That is almost a complete reversal of a similar poll conducted in September 2004 in which 48 per cent said they would vote Liberal and 37 per cent Labor. 

The latest poll shows nine per cent support for the Greens, down two per cent on September 2004. 

Most revealing was the question of how respondents voted last election, with 39 per cent saying Liberal, 34 per cent Labor and 10 per cent Green. 

"Further analysis reveals that whilst 93 per cent of previous Labor voters said they intended to do so again, the figures were only 76 per cent for Liberal voters and 69 per cent for Green voters," Nexus said. 

"Labor have thus claimed 20 per cent of previous Liberal voters and 26 per cent of previous Green voters within Melbourne and Sydney. 

"The two cities together make up almost a third of Australia's total population and are often indicative of coming trends." 

*Nexus also asked its respondents whether they thought they would be better off, about the same or worse off under a government run by Kevin Rudd, John Howard or Peter Costello. 

For all three, about half thought it would be about the same. 

Twenty-two per cent thought they would be better off under Kevin Rudd, 16 per cent under John Howard and 13 per cent under Peter Costello."*_

Well, no joy yet for the Liberal "Team" - and another poll on the weekend gives Bennelong to Ms McKew with a 7% swing against "Mr Magic"....

AJ


----------



## moXJO (17 September 2007)

moxy said:


> It won't be a "tight" election...far from it. Its called an humiliating LANDSLIDE swing to labor. As if you can call it tight from this bl**dy forum poll, HAHA!!!.




Its tosser statements like this that gives labor a perceived arrogance by the swinging voters.And gives libs an underdog tag. What people vote on the day can be entirely different to how they were going to vote.


----------



## greggy (17 September 2007)

doctorj said:


> I'm surprised to find I'm the only fence sitter at the moment.
> 
> I'd normally consider myself on the left, but the idea of an opposition party rolling back the reforms of the government when they get to power makes me nervous.



I'm sitting on ther fence as well as I've done all my life. I will make my mind up during the election campaign.  My political philosophy is small "l" liberal.  
Disunity within government's ranks during the past week is a real turn off.  They're not focussing effectively on what matters for ordinary Australians.
As far as I'm concerned, overall the Howard Government has been a very reasonable one, but now its looking tired.  I felt that it started going off the rails somewhat with its IR legislation.  Despite the huge advertising campaign the IR   Laws are very unpopular indeed with voters.  I'm a firm believer that good employers, and there's few here in this forum, who take care of their good staff.  But IMO the problem here is that too many employers have exploited it for their own benefit.  If it wasn't for the IR Laws I feel that the Howard Government would now be in a much stronger position.  
Also, why are we still in Iraq when little headway has been achieved?  I'm glad they got rid of Saddam and just feel that it is now up to the Iraqi people to take on more responsibility. 
Five interest rate increases during its current term has also had a significant impact. Its good to see unemployment so low and that inflation is largely under control.   
IMO the Howard Government has stopped listening to the people on a number of issues.  The arrogant Keating Goverrnment also stopped listening ans was thrashed out of office back in 1996.  Voters respond in kind when governments stop listening.
On the flip side, wall to wall govenments of one political persuasion is a worry.  I rather have a spread of different parties in government at the various levels.  
Rudd's relative lack of political experience (no ministerial experience) is also worrying although his CV in terms of work experience is very good indeed (e.g. Chief of Staff to Wayne Goss in Qld, diplomat, KPMG experience in China).  If Mark Latham were still in charge I would not even consider voting Labor, but Rudd hasn't scared the voters thus far. He's very similar to Howard in many respects.


----------



## mexican (17 September 2007)

moXJO said:


> Its tosser statements like this that gives labor a perceived arrogance by the swinging voters.And gives libs an underdog tag. What people vote on the day can be entirely different to how they were going to vote.



If that is a issue with swinging voters, well they are only switching from one arrogant party to another.
I find it quite amusing Howard and Costello call Rudd arrogant!


----------



## moXJO (17 September 2007)

mexican said:


> If that is a issue with swinging voters, well they are only switching from one arrogant party to another.
> I find it quite amusing Howard and Costello call Rudd arrogant!




The unionists were told to shut up shop to the media for a reason. Too many dumb statements affecting the public vote.Personal attacks or general attacks hardly make people want to vote for one party more then the other.


----------



## mexican (17 September 2007)

moXJO said:


> The unionists were told to shut up shop to the media for a reason. Too many dumb statements affecting the public vote.Personal attacks or general attacks hardly make people want to vote for one party more then the other.




Agree! A good example was with Rudd and the strip club.
Maybe some of the Lib pollies should do the same as the unionists!


----------



## The Mint Man (17 September 2007)

explod said:


> Everyone and thing has to start somewhere.



I agree with that in general but a good place to start would be for Rudd to explain his policies (if any that are worth explaining) so that we can get an idea of what exactly we would be voting for. Theres just too much spin and PR work in his campaign for mine. He needs to stop going on airy fairy shows that ask questions like 'would you go out with John Howard?' and start going on shows that will actually press him for answers. IMHO, So far he has avoided this as much as he can. I know hes scared of this type of interview but if he is going for the top job then he needs to step up more often then not.

Cheers


----------



## 2020hindsight (17 September 2007)

I'm in trouble on where to vote federally
NSW state I was able to identify with the fishing party with their motto "1 fish, 1 vote"  (glub glub)
or was it "I fish, I vote"  keep forgetting the motto here. 
But I don't think they stand for federal matters


----------



## marklar (17 September 2007)

Was actually thinking of voting for myself (ie. running as an independent)

m.


----------



## Rafa (17 September 2007)

The Mint Man said:


> I agree with that in general but a good place to start would be for Rudd to explain his policies (if any that are worth explaining) so that we can get an idea of what exactly we would be voting for. Theres just too much spin and PR work in his campaign for mine. He needs to stop going on airy fairy shows that ask questions like 'would you go out with John Howard?' and start going on shows that will actually press him for answers. IMHO, So far he has avoided this as much as he can. I know hes scared of this type of interview but if he is going for the top job then he needs to step up more often then not.
> 
> Cheers




From what i've read, howard didn't release any policy details in 1996... and to be fair, it is hard to release detailed costed policy, without treasury resources.

But howard didn't release his policies in 2004 either...where was the IR policy in 2004?


----------



## marklar (17 September 2007)

Rafa said:


> But howard didn't release his policies in 2004 either...where was the IR policy in 2004?



Howard had tried to push his IR policies through the Senate for many years, it was only after '04 when he (surprisingly) had the numbers it got through.

m.


----------



## Rafa (17 September 2007)

marklar said:


> Howard had tried to push his IR policies through the Senate for many years, it was only after '04 when he (surprisingly) had the numbers it got through.
> 
> m.




Ofcourse thats what they wanted to do...  Nick Minchin is on record at some right wing talk fest for saying that he is sorry work choices does't go far enough... 

Hence, are you saying that its ok for the Libs take work choices even further if they win the election, even tho in the election this was never stated as a policy? 

Eg: there was always talk of unfair dismissal laws being revoked for small businesses, never for businesses of 100 people!

Work Choices, the policy, or whatever its called now, didn't exist in 2004...


----------



## The Mint Man (17 September 2007)

Rafa said:


> From what i've read, howard didn't release any policy details in 1996... and to be fair, it is hard to release detailed costed policy, without treasury resources.
> 
> But howard didn't release his policies in 2004 either...where was the IR policy in 2004?



Thats fine. But your missing my main point.... Rudd is hardly ever on serious TV or talk back shows. So, A) he never has a good chance of getting his policies details out there for everyone to see  and B) he is rarely asked hard questions about his policies which is the reason for point A.
I understand that costing these things out would be hard at the best of times but thats part of Swans job isnt it? and what you said is hardly an excuse for not trying or being way off the mark. I mean these are the people that will be taking control of the government if they are elected. Further more Rudd is usually light on ANY detail when it comes to his policies... EG: the renter rebate (or whatever he called it) that he proudly advertised on the news a couple of months back. After the media fished for details it turned out that it wasnt so attractive as rudd was making it out to be, I mean the chick that he was proudly explaining it to wouldnt have even qualified for it!

Cheers


----------



## dalek (17 September 2007)

explod said:


> Steve Bracks had only been in Parliament a short time when he took over from Kennet and did well
> 
> J




Just what was it he did again ???


But, I digress from the original question....who to pick ?? 
No doubt all things (governments) reach a maturity, or use by date, and arguably the current crew, in their present configuration, are there.
In fact if the Age newspapers letters to the editor are any guide, the Howard clan will be "run out of town" sometime soon. This will apparently lead to vast improvement in everything from future weather patterns to my football teams performance.
Maybe we need a new D'Artagnan but who the hell are those musketeers in the shadows ??? seems a lot more than three of them to me.


----------



## juiceman (18 September 2007)

Look's like, and reminds me of Mr Ma Goo
Kevin Rudd that is


----------



## Aussiejeff (18 September 2007)

juiceman said:


> Look's like, and reminds me of Mr Ma Goo
> Kevin Rudd that is





No need to worry about Rudd007 getting elected folks. This poll now shows a landslide win to the coalition! 

AJ


----------



## marklar (18 September 2007)

Rafa said:


> are you saying that its ok for the Libs take work choices even further if they win the election, even tho in the election this was never stated as a policy?



People deserve to get the government they vote for.  Howard lied several times prior to getting re-elected in 2001, yet that didn't seem to matter in 2004.  He can do what he likes with impunity because the majority of Australians voted for him to be able to so.

Don't like it? Campaign against them.  Anyone remember the phrase "keep the bastards honest"?

m.


----------



## greggy (18 September 2007)

juiceman said:


> Look's like, and reminds me of Mr Ma Goo
> Kevin Rudd that is



If I was totally pissed and Howard and Rudd walked in together at the local pub I wouldn't be able to tell them apart.  They both look similar, both are geeks, boring and conservative. Neither one has scared the "horses".


----------



## numbercruncher (18 September 2007)

> There are gaping holes in Australia’s education and training system. We are facing an estimated shortage of skilled workers of 240,000 within the next ten years.
> 
> To put this in perspective, that is two and half times the number who came to this nation from 30 other countries in the 1940s to built the Snowy Hydro Electric Scheme. And we find State government officials bumping into each other in towns across northern England, as they scour the streets for nurses and doctors to bring back to Australia because of our training shortages.
> 
> ...





About time someone was prepared to act properly on the skills shortage.


----------



## chops_a_must (18 September 2007)

numbercruncher said:


> About time someone was prepared to act properly on the skills shortage.



Yep, referencing my post below


chops_a_must said:


> And while we are on union bashing, why don't we get rid of the most powerful  and saturated union workforce of all? You know the one I am talking about... the police? Why aren't people prepared to take them on?
> 
> And in all seriousness, what's the difference between a union... and an association? I'm a member of my industry's largest association. We lobby for legislative changes, protect members, have workshops, training days, public information campaigns etc etc. Everything a union should do. So why not get rid of it? Why not get rid of the AMA as they are also effectively a union. Why not? They are an overtly political body.
> 
> ...




Can someone address the issues raised here. Thankyou.


----------



## numbercruncher (19 September 2007)

> Australia 'lagging on public education'
> Tuesday Sep 18 23:49 AEST
> Australia is spending less on public education than most other developed countries, new figures show.
> 
> A report released by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) finds Australia has among the lowest levels of public spending on schools, vocational education and universities combined, and trails only the US and Korea in private spending on education.




http://optuszoo.news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=70686&_cobr=optus


And thanks to Johnny "dumb down your Kids" Howard this is the exact reason why I have had to enrol my Daugther in a private School


----------



## numbercruncher (23 September 2007)

I Like how this blogger puts it ....




> This government has been in power since I was 19 and now I'm 30..Long enough! What do they have to show for it? An unskilled ageing population, dated infrastructure, divisive policies and an economy based mostly on a hole in the ground. Time to go, John!


----------



## Whiskers (23 September 2007)

chops_a_must said:


> Yep, referencing my post below
> 
> 
> Can someone address the issues raised here. Thankyou.




I'm waiting too chops.

'Work Choices' is just another example of this governments extreme over emphasis on economic performance to the detrement of social standards and lifestyle.

'Work Choices' not only took away common law rights from the workplace but common sense also.


----------



## chops_a_must (23 September 2007)

This might raise the ire of some of the religious wrong (right):



> 'Gay dirt' blamed on Labor
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Any guesses as to who it is? I wonder what Heffernan's comments about it are going to be...

Good to see that Labor are no longer going to passively cop the old dirt and scare campaign that the Libs are famous for. Something that was a criticism of old Kim nd Labor generally, from hardened lefties. Because there is some huge dirt on these guys, and it should be known.

I also heard Downer didn't want to get into SA politics because, "It is a busted **** state".

And one for the road:


----------



## numbercruncher (23 September 2007)

Isnt it just shocking, Liberals spread rumours about there own people and then in turn say its Labor doing it. Typical though I guess, a sign of Australias future path should they get back in 



> Libs spreading gay bathhouse file: Oakes
> Sunday Sep 23 11:04 AEST
> Nine Network political editor Laurie Oakes says the Liberal Party is behind a "fact sheet" about a Howard government minister who visits gay bathhouses and harasses other men.
> 
> ...




http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=289740


----------



## Whiskers (23 September 2007)

chops_a_must said:


> And one for the road:




Is that a smurk behind that finger!???  

I adjust my glasses a lot too, but I usually do it with the pointer finger. I tried with THAT finger and it is quite hard and unnatural for me to fold back all the other fingers. I tend to bend THAT finger in and extend the others out.


----------



## moXJO (23 September 2007)

Whiskers said:


> Is that a smurk behind that finger!???
> 
> I adjust my glasses a lot too, but I usually do it with the pointer finger. I tried with THAT finger and it is quite hard and unnatural for me to fold back all the other fingers. I tend to bend THAT finger in and extend the others out.




Finger conspiracies 

Chops most of the union bashing is directed towards the construction industry.


----------



## brilliantmichael (23 September 2007)

If Howard wins again, see what he would act like when he does:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsSkrgqrCgc


----------



## moneymajix (23 September 2007)

Doormat

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/opinion/animations/0,25199,30,00.html


----------



## noco (23 September 2007)

Noted articale in the Courier Mail September19 2007, when it stated Kevin07 shredded documents from the Heiner Inquiry in 1990. A 3600 page report by NSW. QC David Rolfe allegedly identifying 67 breaches of the criminal code by  members of the former Queensland Labor Cabinet, ministerial staff and public servants.Kevin 07 Premier was  Wayne Goss's chief of staff.
What did he have to hide and why did he destroy the documents? Looks "fishy" to me. If he has nothing to hide he should tell the public.


----------



## greggy (25 September 2007)

chops_a_must said:


> This might raise the ire of some of the religious wrong (right):
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Funny how all the dirt is coming out around election (e.g. the stripper incident, Rudd's health, "gay" rumours etc).  Voters get turned off by all these political games.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 October 2007)

anyone in the mood for some cynicism ? 
Here's a pretty good clue that the election will be before Xmas

and even before the Abs take off en masse on their Xmas holidays - their annual pilgrimage to their coastal beach houses ........

(PS those medical teams are obviuosly doing a good job - but is it sustainable?  still, better to light a candle than curse the darkies all the time I suppose ...

-   especially during an election year which is where all the "energy" for this operation came from in the first place  )

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/01/2047511.htm?section=justin


> NT child health checks to stop for holidays
> Posted 20 minutes ago
> 
> Map: Darwin 0800
> ...




I also liked this cartoon on Johnny's theory of the need for action on global warming


----------



## noirua (1 October 2007)

I'm all for lowering interest rates to 3.5% and weakening the Aussie against the Greenback.  This would bring in far stronger profits for the miners and oilers. Inflation would rise, but the price of imported goods would as well and give home grown companies a fairer playing field.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 October 2007)

brilliantmichael said:


> If Howard wins again, see what he would act like when he does:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsSkrgqrCgc



michael , good one, lol,   old Yoda sounds like a mixture of Buddha and Mister Magoo XXX no, that should be Buddha and Gollum... (from Tolkien's Hobbit) 
off topic etc - but I never realised before how much Starwars borrowed from Buddhism 



> Emperor Palpatine : hehe - the jedi are no more
> Master Yoda :  not if anything to say about it, I have!
> "telekinetic biff" ...
> Emperor Palpatine : ahhhhh
> ...




PS probably fair to say that neither Rudd nor Howard could ever dream of such a squeeky clean image as Yoda yes? - other than the ears maybe 

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


> Character overview
> Master Yoda is portrayed as the wisest and most powerful Jedi in the galaxy. George Lucas originally wished Yoda to follow his other characters in having a full name: Yoda Minch. The films and Expanded Universe reveal that he had trained several notable Jedi, including .... Obi-Wan Kenobi (partially, before Qui-Gon Jinn took over with Obi-Wan's training); .... and eventually Luke Skywalker.
> 
> ........ The Star Wars prequel films explain that he instructed all younglings in the Jedi Temple before they were assigned to a master. .....
> ...




"*Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering*" -    hey ! the Starwars scriptwriters have been reading Aung San Suu Kyi's papers  !!


----------



## johnw7000 (1 October 2007)

Watch the movie 'the war on democracy', the whole political system has been allowed by us (after all we are the true bosses-they are the public servants) to become a pathetic joke.

Although I am curious to see where Peter Garret goes with his political career.

VOTE 1: Peter Garret


----------



## Julia (1 October 2007)

johnw7000 said:


> Watch the movie 'the war on democracy', the whole political system has been allowed by us (after all we are the true bosses-they are the public servants) to become a pathetic joke.
> 
> Although I am curious to see where Peter Garret goes with his political career.
> 
> VOTE 1: Peter Garret




Garrett seems to polarise people.
He would be absolutely the last person I'd vote for.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 October 2007)

johnw7000 said:


> Watch the movie 'the war on democracy', the whole political system has been allowed by us (after all we are the true bosses-they are the public servants) to become a pathetic joke.
> Although I am curious to see where Peter Garret goes with his political career.
> VOTE 1: Peter Garret




trailer :-
 The War On Democracy Film Trailer by John Pilger
 John Pilger - The War On Democracy - Part 1 of 10
etc etc parts 1 through 10 

btw johnw,
this is not too dissimilar to the BBC documentary on who killed Aung San, the father of Aung San Suu Kyi. - and (arguably) directly caused all the problems that Burma has today !!

except there it was probably not 10 Downing Street involved, 
whereas here it is (arguably) senior members in US govt involved, if not the White House (spread out over the years). 
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=207526&highlight=aung#post207526


----------



## Whiskers (1 October 2007)

Looks like no later than early December election. 

What the hell is he going to pull out this campaign!?



> *DJ Australian Voter Support For Government Slips In Latest Poll*
> 
> SYDNEY (Dow Jones)--Voter support for Australia's ruling Liberal-National coalition has slipped slightly over the past two weeks, a poll has found, signaling the government could still face a significant defeat if an election is to be called now.
> 
> ...


----------



## nioka (1 October 2007)

Julia said:


> Garrett seems to polarise people.
> He would be absolutely the last person I'd vote for.




I used to think that. Now I'm not so sure. The first person I USED to vote for was Howard and I was wrong there so now I'm open minded about Garrett.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 October 2007)

2020hindsight said:


> anyone in the mood for some cynicism ?
> Here's a pretty good clue that the election will be before Xmas
> 
> and even before the Abs take off en masse on their Xmas holidays - their annual pilgrimage to their coastal beach houses ........
> ...




Even the Army are getting annoyed with doing the pollie's work for them ...

It was always gonna be unsustainable - sheesh !!!  And it was always gonna be "for the cameras" in an election year imo.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/10/01/2048221.htm?section=justin


> Brough slams calls for Indigenous intervention head to quit
> Posted 1 hour 2 minutes ago
> 
> Federal Indigenous Affairs Minister Mal Brough has poured scorn on calls for the head of the Government's Indigenous intervention task force, Major General Dave Chalmers, to resign.
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 October 2007)

THis bloke is quoting Crikey dot com as of a month ago...



> Taking Aboriginal land
> By jquiggin | September 2, 2007
> 
> One of the striking features of the government’s intervention in Aboriginal communities, embodied in the Northern Territory National Emergency Response Act 2007 was how rapidly the ostensible motive of intervening to tackle social problems, most notably child abuse, was swallowed by the ideological push to refashion property rights, taking over land owned by Aboriginal communities, with the presumed goal of turning it into individualised private property
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 October 2007)

http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20070926-Broughs-bulldozing-backyard-blitz.html
Brough’s bulldozing backyard blitz
Wednesday, 26 September 2007



> Even as Mal Brough was belatedly preparing to announce some long term measures that would go beyond the six months of the "National Emergency", agents of his intervention were smashing the most rudimentary housing available to too many Aboriginal people: the tin humpy.
> 
> *Non-Aboriginal contractors at the Territory’s largest Aboriginal town, Yuendumu, three weeks ago bulldozed a corrugated iron shelter, home to a couple and their seven month old daughter*.
> 
> ...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (1 October 2007)

Two of the more outlandish folk running in this federal election

http://www.paulinehanson.com.au/

http://www.bobbrown.org.au/

Garpal


----------



## wayneL (1 October 2007)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Two of the more outlandish folk running in this federal election
> 
> http://www.paulinehanson.com.au/
> 
> ...



While not agreeing or disagreeing, why are these two "outlandish"?

out·land·ish      /aʊtˈlÃ¦ndɪʃ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[out-lan-dish] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1.	freakishly or grotesquely strange or odd, as appearance, dress, objects, ideas, or practices; bizarre: outlandish clothes; outlandish questions.
2.	having a foreign appearance.
3.	remote from civilized areas; out-of the-way: an outlandish settlement.
4.	Archaic. foreign; alien.


----------



## chops_a_must (1 October 2007)

wayneL said:


> While not agreeing or disagreeing, why are these two "outlandish"?
> 
> out·land·ish      /aʊtˈlÃ¦ndɪʃ/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[out-lan-dish] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
> –adjective
> ...




One was, but now isn't. Because their policies were taken in as the norm. One has never been, because of his consistent voting results. I may be biased though, Bob Brown likes me.


----------



## wayneL (1 October 2007)

chops_a_must said:


> One was, but now isn't.



lol


----------



## Whiskers (1 October 2007)

2020hindsight said:


> http://www.crikey.com.au/Politics/20070926-Broughs-bulldozing-backyard-blitz.html
> Brough’s bulldozing backyard blitz
> Wednesday, 26 September 2007
> 
> Without warning, an outside (Alice Springs?) contractor turned up with a map, a demountable building, and plant and equipment, and proceeded to clear the site.




When will they learn!!!??? 

This looks so much like Brough and Howard trying to *endoctrinate* aboriginal people to white man culture again. How many houses and suburbs, even towns have they supplied to the aboriginal community like this that have been abandoned, trashed or distroyed. 

If they provide resources and expertise to let the aboriginals participate in the design and construction of their houses and communities it will not only win the hearts and minds of the community, but they will get a dwelling they will appreciate and be comfortable with.


----------



## Julia (1 October 2007)

nioka said:


> I used to think that. Now I'm not so sure. The first person I USED to vote for was Howard and I was wrong there so now I'm open minded about Garrett.



Nioka, would you have still felt OK about John Howard had he not snuggled up to GWB and supported the Iraq war etc?  It was this which turned the tide for me;  his absolute refusal to consider the views of the majority of Australians.  The mantra about "we need to be one with our major ally" has a hollow ring to it as far as I'm concerned.  Little New Zealand doesn't have anyone to come to its aid in the unlikely event of any invasion, but they have had the fortitude to stand by their own convictions over American nuclear ships many years ago, and over the Iraq war more recently.

Re Garrett:  I don't like zealots.  And a zealot is what he was until he joined the Labor Party.  Now he seems to simply parrot off the Labor Party line as he is instructed to do.  So much for his convictions.  Apart from that, I admit I just can't stand to look at him!  (Yes, I know, shouldn't judge people by appearances etc etc.)


----------



## nioka (2 October 2007)

Julia said:


> Nioka, would you have still felt OK about John Howard had he not snuggled up to GWB and supported the Iraq war etc?  It was this which turned the tide for me;  his absolute refusal to consider the views of the majority of Australians.  The mantra about "we need to be one with our major ally" has a hollow ring to it as far as I'm concerned.  Little New Zealand doesn't have anyone to come to its aid in the unlikely event of any invasion, but they have had the fortitude to stand by their own convictions over American nuclear ships many years ago, and over the Iraq war more recently.
> 
> Re Garrett:  I don't like zealots.  And a zealot is what he was until he joined the Labor Party.  Now he seems to simply parrot off the Labor Party line as he is instructed to do.  So much for his convictions.  Apart from that, I admit I just can't stand to look at him!  (Yes, I know, shouldn't judge people by appearances etc etc.)



I started to dislike Howard when he did not disagree with Costello's "noncore promise". They he disarmed the law abiding and let the crims keep their guns. He showed his fear of guns by wearing a bullet proof vest at Gympie. Then there was the lies and deceit towards Pauline Hanson but still used most of the policies she promoted. He was deceitful about the Tampa. All that was before Iraq which was the final straw.
 Peter Garrett is a different case, I agree he echoes Labour policy but he probably influences it a lot. This gets a green view into politics without the extremes of Bob Brown, who has done more harm than good to the enviroment. He (Bob Brown) has stopped necessary dams and has caused forestry to be more destructive than necessary. His policies force forestry to abandon sustainable harvesting and causing a lot more clear felling than there should or could be. By Garrett being with labour and not the greens I think we will get a better outcome for the enviroment. We need another like him in the coalition.


----------



## Rafa (3 October 2007)

govt lies...


http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/authors-threaten-to-sue-hockey/2007/10/02/1191091115247.html



> AUTHORS of a report revealing employees on Australian Workplace Agreements are earning $106 less than other workers are preparing to sue the Federal Workplace Relations Minister, Joe Hockey, who branded them "former trade union officials who are parading as academics".
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


----------



## greggy (6 October 2007)

Julia said:


> Nioka, would you have still felt OK about John Howard had he not snuggled up to GWB and supported the Iraq war etc?  It was this which turned the tide for me;  his absolute refusal to consider the views of the majority of Australians.  The mantra about "we need to be one with our major ally" has a hollow ring to it as far as I'm concerned.  Little New Zealand doesn't have anyone to come to its aid in the unlikely event of any invasion, but they have had the fortitude to stand by their own convictions over American nuclear ships many years ago, and over the Iraq war more recently.
> 
> Re Garrett:  I don't like zealots.  And a zealot is what he was until he joined the Labor Party.  Now he seems to simply parrot off the Labor Party line as he is instructed to do.  So much for his convictions.  Apart from that, I admit I just can't stand to look at him!  (Yes, I know, shouldn't judge people by appearances etc etc.)



Hi Julia,

I totally agree with you about Garrett's convictions. I had more respect for him when he stood for the NDP (Nuclear Disarmanent Party) in the 1980s where he just missed out on getting into the Senate. 
Back then he stuck to his beliefs and was more passionate. Now he's just like most politicians. He falls into line behind the leader.  Look at the pulp mill decision for instance. I'm against it on environmental grounds as I feel that the environmental effects may well prove to be devastating. I'm also concerned that the decision to go ahead has been made too quickly by both the state and federal governments.  I reckon that Turnbull was a bit hesitant in giving the go ahead, but Howard may well have been in the background pulling the strings.  It would have been a smart political move for Turnbull to have said no, but that is now history.  
Turnbull is in a very marginal seat and this decision will not help him one bit.  Pity though as I like him, being one of the few moderates still around in the Liberal Party.  I remember on one occasion especially when he talked about tax reform that would give greater relief to low and middle income earners in particular.  I also admired his republican stand and feel that he could one day be PM.


----------



## Awesomandy (6 October 2007)

The pulp mill will be built, no matter what the environmental costs are. If you still remember what happened last election, when Federal Labor announced that Tasmanian forests will be protected, and they would then help timber workers to look for other jobs... just look at how many seats they have lost. It was a complete disaster for fed Labor in Tasmania. 

So, the fact is, the party who wants to pick up that seat will have to promote jobs in that region ahead of any environmental impacts, and both parties can clearly see this point, going into the current election.


----------



## greggy (8 October 2007)

Awesomandy said:


> The pulp mill will be built, no matter what the environmental costs are. If you still remember what happened last election, when Federal Labor announced that Tasmanian forests will be protected, and they would then help timber workers to look for other jobs... just look at how many seats they have lost. It was a complete disaster for fed Labor in Tasmania.
> 
> So, the fact is, the party who wants to pick up that seat will have to promote jobs in that region ahead of any environmental impacts, and both parties can clearly see this point, going into the current election.




Awesomandy, it certainly wasn't "a complete disaster for fed Labor in Tasmania". They still retained 3 of the 5 lower house seats there at the last election.  To try to protect their 2 Tasmanian seats, the Liberals risk losing even a greater number of seats elsewhere due in part to the pulp mill decision.  Wentworth, Turnbull's seat, is one good example.


----------



## chops_a_must (8 October 2007)

I'm surprised no one has spoken about the health care funding fiasco.

All state governments are increasing spending at a faster rate than the feds, admittedly. Yet, most states are in financial difficulty and cannot afford more health care demands, with the feds sitting on a massive surplus. Where do _you_ think the problem lies?


----------



## Julia (8 October 2007)

chops_a_must said:


> I'm surprised no one has spoken about the health care funding fiasco.
> 
> All state governments are increasing spending at a faster rate than the feds, admittedly. Yet, most states are in financial difficulty and cannot afford more health care demands, with the feds sitting on a massive surplus. Where do _you_ think the problem lies?




Where do you think the problem lies?

Well, for a start reducing the number of bureaucrats.  I can't recall the actual percentages but Qld Health has about twice as many bureaucrats/administrative staff as they do health workers.

I wouldn't be letting State governments off the hook by saying it's lack of federal funding that's the problem for one fraction of a millisecond.
I don't know about other States, but Qld Health is a total ***** fiasco, and nothing much has changed since Beattie vowed to clean it up following the Dr Death scandal.  Dr. Death, btw, is still swanning around in the USA and will probably never be extradited to face justice here.

I have a friend in hospital here at present following a major operation.
She was told prior to admission:  you only get one pillow so if you want more, then bring your own.

If I were down to my last dollar it would be spent on private cover rather than risk being dependent on our health system.


----------



## chops_a_must (8 October 2007)

Julia said:


> Where do you think the problem lies?
> 
> I wouldn't be letting State governments off the hook by saying it's lack of federal funding that's the problem for one fraction of a millisecond.
> I don't know about other States, but Qld Health is a total ***** fiasco, and nothing much has changed since Beattie vowed to clean it up following the Dr Death scandal.  Dr. Death, btw, is still swanning around in the USA and will probably never be extradited to face justice here.



That's a federal policing problem now.

And believe it or not Julia, if the banana benders decided to grow a few more brain cells, they could _choose_ to have fluoride in their water for instance.

As to the pillows, yes, that is a funding issue. As to the bureaucrats/ administration staff. I know here, they can't _get_ those staff. And don't forget, all the data entry people, OHS and many other positions will be included in amongst these. Anecdotally at least, everyone I know in these positions is chronically over worked. So I think it's a non issue.

As to funding, here in WA the feds wouldn't fund an MRI for our childrens hospital. Nor would they even LICENSE it! You can only penny pinch down to a certain level before things break...

WA just isn't bothering anymore, and we are going into massive debt to fund new hospitals. Funny that, considering we are the boom state...


----------



## Rafa (9 October 2007)

the spilt of resources between private and public health has only meant one thing... a poorer level of service for all...

i wonder how much money the feds have pumped into private health, with the rebates, etc...

its common sense.. spilt the same money, between two systems, you get two half baked systems!

but they haven't learnt... via the 45m contrib. to the Mersey Hospital and now their stupid plan for local boards... How the hell are local boards going to be able to look at the big picture. All they are going to be interested in is their own patch... 

If we are going to excuse the liberals for the poor state of health at the moment(even tho the figures state they have underfunded the states in the last 10 years)... thats fair enough

BUT... knowing their plans for the future put forward by the incompetent abbott and co, you'd be hard-pressed to find excuses to exempt the liberals of blame for the inevitable further deterioration in the health system.
the spilt of resources between private and public health has only meant one thing... a poorer level of service for all...

i wonder how much money the feds have pumped into private health, with the rebates, etc...

its common sense.. spilt the same money, between two systems, you get two half baked systems!

but they haven't learnt... via the 45m contrib. to the Mersey Hospital and now their stupid plan for local boards... How the hell are local boards going to be able to look at the big picture. All they are going to be interested in is their own patch... 

If we are going to excuse the liberals for the poor state of health at the moment(even tho the figures state they have underfunded the states in the last 10 years)... thats fair enough

BUT... knowing their plans for the future put forward by the incompetent abbott and co, you'd be hard-pressed to find excuses to exempt the liberals of blame for the inevitable further deterioration in the health system.



And speaking of abbott and co…. is it just me that is slightly bemused at the way the liberals are trying to focus on the rest of the labor team…?

I mean… does anyone really consider the likes of Downer, Nelson, Andrews, Abbott, McFarlane, Hockey and Coonan actually competent???


----------



## Whiskers (9 October 2007)

Rafa said:


> but they haven't learnt... via the 45m contrib. to the Mersey Hospital and now their stupid plan for local boards... How the hell are local boards going to be able to look at the big picture. All they are going to be interested in is their own patch...




Rafa, I'm curious why you think the re-introduction of hospital boards, in Qld at least, won't work.

While not expert in the field, I can recall when we had local hospital boards and I think most people I know who can remember them, will say it was a better system. As I have heard it described, if they were re-introduced, the local boards would be made up of local medical professional, business and community members. This does away with most of the central bureaucracy and puts the responsibility for running the local hospitals as well as being accountable for any problems on the local community. The way I understand it they put in their applications for funding which is still largely decided at state and federal levels.


----------



## spartn (9 October 2007)

Hi

Personally I couldn't give a flying f(*k who won, why? Because I am not stupid enough too have my job as my only form of income. 

I am sick and tired of people saying that interest rates are causing you too struggle on your home repayment, this is what i have to say:
"If you didn't at least have the first year mortgage repayment when you first applied to get a house. Shut the bloody hell up", no one give a crap about what you have to say because people like you are going to struggle regardless who is in POWER.

Tell me this when the new workplace relations came into work, answer this. Did you just listen what the union has to say about it. Or did you actually do your own bloody research to see what it is all about. Or was more important to sit on your **** and watch TV.

If you are smart and NOT bloody lazy, trust me. It doesn't matter who is in power, you will make enough money. It happened under the keating and Hawk governments and it happened under the Howard government, and it will continue to happen if Rudd gets into power.

Spartn

:viking:


----------



## chops_a_must (9 October 2007)

Whiskers said:


> Rafa, I'm curious why you think the re-introduction of hospital boards, in Qld at least, won't work.
> 
> While not expert in the field, I can recall when we had local hospital boards and I think most people I know who can remember them, will say it was a better system. As I have heard it described, if they were re-introduced, the local boards would be made up of local medical professional, business and community members. This does away with most of the central bureaucracy and puts the responsibility for running the local hospitals as well as being accountable for any problems on the local community. The way I understand it they put in their applications for funding which is still largely decided at state and federal levels.




The mental health system works like this and it is an abject failure.

Client's records are not easily passed through, and if you are taken to a hospital outside of your area, you can potentially wait for a week before a psychiatrist will agree to see you.


----------



## Rafa (9 October 2007)

Whiskers said:


> Rafa, I'm curious why you think the re-introduction of hospital boards, in Qld at least, won't work.




So far, reading articles in the Australian, most doubt that this will fix anything... because the biggest issue is funding... with the liberal commonwealth govt being found out to be significantly short changing the states over the last 10 years.

Cant comment on QLD whiskers, don't live there... From what i know in the other states at least, this is how the system was run many years ago and it didn't work and the boards were getting highly politicised.

With local hospiital boards, decisions won't be made in the best interest of the region, rather its highly politicises the whole process, and like the mersey hospital, those in the marginal seats or those with the most political clout will get the funds from the pollies.

Having boards, only allows more blame shifting... imagine that now... howard can blame not just the states, also the boards... and vice versa.

Secondly, the board simply adds another layer of administration... and as Julia said in her post, 


> Where do you think the problem lies?
> Well, for a start reducing the number of bureaucrats. I can't recall the actual percentages but Qld Health has about twice as many bureaucrats/administrative staff as they do health workers.




You can't run health in a silo'ed structure, where each area is only focused on itself... Just like a corporation that is heavily silo'ed up, its inefficient, but whats worse, it competes against itself and eats into its own profits... Its gotta be run as one corporation... 

With health, its about servicing the whole of region needs most efficiently.


----------



## Judd (9 October 2007)

It is very sad.  No matter who I vote for I still just get a politician.  I have come to detest both sides of politics.  I need to ignore the splinter groups as they cannot govern.

So what happens? It comes down to 16 or so marginal seats.  In other words my vote counts for absolutely nothing and I have to put up with whatever the various Kaths', Kims', Kels' and Sharrons' place on their ballot sheet.


----------



## Pat (9 October 2007)

Judd said:


> It is very sad.  No matter who I vote for I still just get a politician.  I have come to detest both sides of politics.  I need to ignore the splinter groups as they cannot govern.
> 
> So what happens? It comes down to 16 or so marginal seats.  In other words my vote counts for absolutely nothing and I have to put up with whatever the various Kaths', Kims', Kels' and Sharrons' place on their ballot sheet.



That is true. But every vote does count, unless you live in the USA. You could say the lesser of two evils... eh? 
Anyway I don't trust the Ruddsta, just like any poli.
For what it's worth Johnny's done ok... I guess.... 
I was sponsored by his surfing team for 2 years (paid to surf that is, just like a sponsorship  ). Now my CGT pays for others like myself, what a vicious circle.


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 October 2007)

There is no relevance here to Australia ok?
nor to any party (Greens or otherwise) as such.
they are talking about matters Irish 
but it's still an interesting message
 Political Broadcast 2007 (Irish)


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 October 2007)

YouTube Politics hits Australia

The Liberal Party:
http://www.youtube.com/liberalparty07

The Labor Party:
http://www.youtube.com/australianlabor

Australian Democrats:
http://www.youtube.com/australiandemo...

The Nationals:
http://www.youtube.com/thenationals

Family First:
http://www.youtube.com/familyfirst

The Greens:
http://www.youtube.com/australiangreens

this one is interesting ... (for being informed etc )


> Australia Votes:
> http://www.youtube.com/australiavotes


----------



## Rafa (12 October 2007)

> *Time to bin conspiracy theories*
> Hedley Thomas | October 12, 2007
> 
> ALL the conspiracy theories, inquisitions, cries of "cover-up" and attempts to link a document-shredding fiasco in Queensland in 1990 to the alleged rape of a teenage girl in 1988 and the political aspirations of Kevin Rudd can be consigned to the bin.
> ...




Full article here...
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22571930-11949,00.html


----------

