This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Turnbull for PM

Jump to new
N

nioka

Joined
15 July 2006
Posts
3,749
Reactions
12
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 

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.
 

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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

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
 
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?
 
Bring back Pete FFS.
 
nioka said:
It looks like Turnbull now has the numbers to regain the leadership of the Liberals.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 

Agree, but there is probably good reason to oppose 100% of everything they do. </hyperbolealert>
 
The Coalition now has a viable option for treasurer (again) but the cupboard is still bare in terms of ready prime ministerial talent.
 
I knew he would come back

No way he would give up politics.

He is a feisty one, that one.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 

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

Real capitalism gives ordinary people the chance to be something of their choosing.
 
nioka said:
In an Ideal world, yes. What we have had is corrupted capitalism. Would you dispute that.
Click to expand...
Therefore not true capitalism.

Therefore capitalism has not failed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bill Shorten: High Flying Fake Or The Worker's Friend
Replies
5
Views
2K
Investoradam
Julie Bishop for PM
2 3
Replies
57
Views
12K
SirRumpole
N
Pauline Hanson for PM?
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
15K
Tisme
Kevin Rudd for PM
27 28 29
Replies
576
Views
62K
drsmith
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...