The Liberals won Bradfield and Higgins, not that you can read into that AT ALL. Except that at last Dr Nelson is gone.
Also, Abbott wants to debate Rudd... hmmm...
I can see the arguments now:
Your plan is stupid!
Oh yeah, your entire values set is stupid. Stupid face.
I'm sick of political debates, because they, like so many other arenas have the sole purpose of substituting facts for soundbites and force of rhetoric.
I like how two fairly safe Liberal seats were played up by every news agency and their dog as "a test of Abbott's new leadership". Of course the Liberals were going to take them you dolts.
Edit: He wants a debate? Seriously?
"Your policy on x is flawed! It'll waste taxpayer dollars!"
"And what's your policy?"
"I... er... um..."
This is not just a repeat of the 2007 election. John Howard and Rudd agreed on an ETS, so it was never the issue. The 2007 test was climate change credentials and Rudd outshone Howard as a candidate of the future.
This time the Rudd-Abbott dispute will be greater and Abbott, unlike Howard in 2007, has political ammunition to fire and a grassroots crusade to lead. He will target Rudd on one issue: explaining the ETS and explaining why Australians need it.
The people will decide this result. For Abbott, the ETS is the prime exhibit of Rudd as a high-taxing, high-spending bureaucrat with Whitlamite overtones, out of touch with people and imposing new cost-of-living pressures on them. The ETS slots perfectly into Abbott's economic campaign.
As an aggressive leader in the Howard mould, Abbott is a mixture of conservative, radical and populist. Many of his opponents misread him. In his recent book Battlelines, Abbott argued "the Federation is broken and does need to be fixed". Convinced the Howard government was punished for the failure of the states, Abbott will hold Rudd to a degree of responsibility for the failures in NSW and Queensland.
As health minister during the Howard era and an unsuccessful advocate for a national takeover of public hospitals, Abbott is guaranteed to put health services at the centre of his campaign by insisting that Rudd is accountable for the condition of public hospitals across the board.
On boat people, he will campaign as a dedicated border protectionist.
On Aboriginal deprivation, he champions Noel Pearson's philosophy and will attack any Rudd retreat to the rights agenda.
On industrial relations, he backs individual agreements on the pre-2005 model before Work Choices. But there are two urgent lessons Abbott must learn from Howard if he wants to succeed.
As a social conservative he must convince people that he does not seek to recast the moral agenda on issues such as abortion and divorce. Second, Abbott's credentials are suspect on economic policy where, too often, he seems inexperienced and unsure, suspicious of markets, reluctant about disciplined costings and inclined to old-fashioned regulation. Labor will gun Abbott on economic policy.
Yay: Health, State Governments.
Nay: Social Policy, IR, Ecconomics, Whiatlamesque... really? Border protection! KEVIN RUDD DOES NOTHING! I WILL DO NOTHING WITH MORE CONVICTION AND HATE!
Don't know: Indigenous stuff. Not really up with that. We killed all ours years ago. (Go us...not)
I was a vote counter for Higgins. The Greens did very well all considering. The climate change denial independent didn't do half bad either (:?). Conservative as fuck seat though. I don't think it's ever been held by a non-liberal. Sigh. Politics just makes me depressed. People I like in other senses can turn themselves into raging cockheads when it comes to politics.
I was a vote counter for Higgins. The Greens did very well all considering. The climate change denial independent didn't do half bad either (:?). Conservative as fuck seat though. I don't think it's ever been held by a non-liberal. Sigh. Politics just makes me depressed. People I like in other senses can turn themselves into raging cockheads when it comes to politics.
I'd like Rudd to come up on the podium on this climate change debate and say "This debate is ridiculous because we're politicians, not scientists, and neither of us are really qualified to have this argument. That being said, here's why Abbott's a jackass."
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has dismissed a challenge for a series of public debates over climate change, saying the Federal Opposition needs to have a policy first.
Are there any loony characteristics of the Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy Australia that I should know about? I'm thinking of joining. I'd join the Democrats, but they're rabidly anti-nuclear and seem to be dying anyway.
Are there any loony characteristics of the Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy Australia that I should know about? I'm thinking of joining. I'd join the Democrats, but they're rabidly anti-nuclear and seem to be dying anyway.
To be fair to Labor, they have their fuckwads (Conroy comes to mind) but they're not that bad. They do need a kick in the arse though, so put some consideration into voting for an independent, probably a Green. If anyone you know votes for Family First, cut them. As in, with a knife.
I looked up the Pirate Party forums but it looks like they're a bunch of tweens who have no idea what the fuck they're really doing. It's like if D&D made a naive attempt at forming a political party.
theSquid on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
I just want a party that tries no major revisions with the exception of:
Equal Rights
R18+ for games
removing all the silly bitch nanny regulation
What I would really really like:
English education for immigrants and refugees, giving them an easier time in Australia
Making prison, particularly juvenile detention centers, a harsher place. Not cruel, but I have a friend who went to juvie and he says it was the most comfortable week of his life.
And bringing automotive production to australia, reducing importing has an excellent effect on greenhouse emissions, those old iron freighters are a goddamn disaster, and this brings us jobs
That, and there's been a general trend towards major parties moving more centrist, in england, and recently in Australia. When Kernot moved to the Labor party it kinda highlighted the end of the centrist party as a force in Australia.
I guess Labor right in the eighties meant Paul Keating, who was still pretty radical (But starting to get central). Nowadays Labor Right can mean Kevin Rudd. Kind of like how little L Liberal now means Turnbull who is pretty palatable compared to Liberal men of past..
That, and there's been a general trend towards major parties moving more centrist, in england, and recently in Australia. When Kernot moved to the Labor party it kinda highlighted the end of the centrist party as a force in Australia.
I guess Labor right in the eighties meant Paul Keating, who was still pretty radical (But starting to get central). Nowadays Labor Right can mean Kevin Rudd. Kind of like how little L Liberal now means Turnbull who is pretty palatable compared to Liberal men of past..
Turnbull was my favorite prominant Liberal in quite a while. He copped an astounding amount of shit from the media, some of it deserved of course, but I genuinely liked the direction he was taking the liberals (and escpecially his hard-line attitude against the more batshit members at times). Even as a pinko lefty, I've always thought that a strong, fair, conservative party is an important force in good politics, and I really felt as though Turnbull was providing that.
I assume Abbot (quite truly one of my most hated public figures) becoming leader is some sort of universal yin-yang balancing act, designed to suck away any sense of warmth I was beginning to develop for the Liberal party.
I assume Abbot (quite truly one of my most hated public figures) becoming leader is some sort of universal yin-yang balancing act, designed to suck away any sense of warmth I was beginning to develop for the Liberal party.
If you ask me, which you didn't (;)) I would say I agree. But worse.
Abbott seems to think: "Well, Howard was in forever, so lets emulate Howard and totally embrace the Howard legacy." Which stinks for two reasons.
One, is that the Howard years were a backlash against thirteen years of Labor. And the Rudd years are a backlash against 11 years of cold hard liberal rule. Which is why with Rudd being who he is, you can't BEAT that was Cold hard Liberalism.
Two, that Howard was an immensely talented politician who knew exactly how to work an electorate. Abbott is not this. Abbott is a right wing knob. Howard was good, because while he was fairly right wing he wasn't batshit crazy rightwing. Abbott is to Howard as Nathan Hauritz is to Shane Warne.
I assume Abbot (quite truly one of my most hated public figures) becoming leader is some sort of universal yin-yang balancing act, designed to suck away any sense of warmth I was beginning to develop for the Liberal party.
If you ask me, which you didn't (;)) I would say I agree. But worse.
Abbott seems to think: "Well, Howard was in forever, so lets emulate Howard and totally embrace the Howard legacy." Which stinks for two reasons.
One, is that the Howard years were a backlash against thirteen years of Labor. And the Rudd years are a backlash against 11 years of cold hard liberal rule. Which is why with Rudd being who he is, you can't BEAT that was Cold hard Liberalism.
Two, that Howard was an immensely talented politician who knew exactly how to work an electorate. Abbott is not this. Abbott is a right wing knob. Howard was good, because while he was fairly right wing he wasn't batshit crazy rightwing. Abbott is to Howard as Nathan Hauritz is to Shane Warne.
I hear you. I never liked Howard's policies. Workchoices was horrible, his refugee policy was bad - in general I found his policies to be uncaring and biased to the upper class. Still though, even then it was hard not to see the political skill he possessed. He knows how to lead, he was intelligent and most of my differences with him probably came down to a fundamental difference in philosophy. Compared to the leaders that Labor were putting up (especially that one :rotate:), he was just flat out on another level. I could have see myself voting for a Howard government if some of the more conservative elements of his policy could have been revoked (though that might say more about the complete lack of Labor competence during the period).
Abbott is not this. I hate Abbott with a passion. He was precisely the kind of liberal I thought would be outsted and gone with the ending of the Howard era. Instead he manages to displace the moderate Turnbull and somehow ends up as fucking leader. Words could not describe my shock when I heard it on the radio. I was flabbergasted.
I never really had a problem with him as Liberal leader, actually. My family was all "OMG CAPITALIST PIG HE'S RICH AND WE HATE HIM" and I didn't really understand that.
I didn't really like his mode of attack on K. Rudd. Say what you will about him [Rudd], but it's that he's made me feel like our political process should be a little more constructive then it is.
Theres been some articles in the age recently about the split in the Liberals and the difference between the conservative faction and the liberal faction. One went into how the liberal party and the conservative party used to be split and how they merged around 1910. A different one suggested that they split now. Which really may not be the worst of ideas. It discussed the demographics in the middle class that the Liberals have to court and how a significant percentage of them are the right on eco/left on social people that are more likely to switch to voting green as they bail on the Liberals than vote Labor. I personally won't be voting for Abbott or any other conservative but depending on circumstances could vote for someone like Turnbull, but instead looks like I'll be voting Green. Also the fact is that they are going to lose the next election regardless, so if theres a time to split it would be now.
Why the hell does Abbott believe that being in opposition means you have to oppose everything the government says? Do it if necessary, yes, but not on everything.
e: Abbott wearing the same tie today as he did when he became opposition leader. I like that tie. Light blue with white and black stripes. Very nice tie.
Annabell Crabb is always funny, assuming she's the SMH's political lulz columnist that I'm always reading. I think she is, anyway.
Yeah, she's just made the switch to the ABC. Probably sensible; I wouldn't want to be sharing page space with Gerard Henderson and Miranda Devine. The stupid might be contagious.
Theres been some articles in the age recently about the split in the Liberals and the difference between the conservative faction and the liberal faction. One went into how the liberal party and the conservative party used to be split and how they merged around 1910. A different one suggested that they split now. Which really may not be the worst of ideas. It discussed the demographics in the middle class that the Liberals have to court and how a significant percentage of them are the right on eco/left on social people that are more likely to switch to voting green as they bail on the Liberals than vote Labor. I personally won't be voting for Abbott or any other conservative but depending on circumstances could vote for someone like Turnbull, but instead looks like I'll be voting Green. Also the fact is that they are going to lose the next election regardless, so if theres a time to split it would be now.
Yeah, we're kinda screwy in that our Free Trade and Protectionist parties merged. It's a kinda of nonsense argument, it's like saying that the Labor Party should break between the Social Conservatives and the Socialists. It's not going to happen, people just seem to think this is a bright idea when the party's suffering post election loss in-fighting. I mean, it's not really a nonsense argument per se. Why shouldn't they separate? Two party preferred voting is why they shouldn't separate. And meddling with that would me more trouble then it is worth. A break away party (Say, Liberals and Conservitives) would only end up having to unite to form a coalition to hold government meaning that nothing would change. The current political parties have institutionalized too much to do anything.
I could see myself voting for a fiscally conservative Labor party member, but my sitting member is a hardcore socialist. Should I therefore suggest that the Hardcore socialist go off and form the Australian Marxist Party Of Tasmania? No. Not really. Just as the Labor Party has to deal with its socialist wing the Liberal Party has to deal with the hardcore nuts.
Lord Of The Pants on
0
Options
The Black HunterThe key is a minimum of compromise, and a simple,unimpeachable reason to existRegistered Userregular
Why the hell does Abbott believe that being in opposition means you have to oppose everything the government says? Do it if necessary, yes, but not on everything.
Annabell Crabb is always funny, assuming she's the SMH's political lulz columnist that I'm always reading. I think she is, anyway.
Yeah, she's just made the switch to the ABC. Probably sensible; I wouldn't want to be sharing page space with Gerard Henderson and Miranda Devine. The stupid might be contagious.
I don't know yet which irony I want to strike Miranda Devine, but I hope one of them does.
Also, has anyone noticed that Labor Politicians seem to be better looking then Liberal ones?
I also see that Tasmania's gift to Question Time isn't sitting next year, as she drinks and drives and her boyfriend assaults her. With out making light of a serious subject, that is so Tasmanian.
edit: this one
The "Cheer squad" got moved from behind Kevin Rudd and the Tasmanian Press asked "Is she out of favour?!?!"
Labor said no no no, we just like to move it around.
By the way don't turn up next time. We'll find someone else.
Posts
I'm sick of political debates, because they, like so many other arenas have the sole purpose of substituting facts for soundbites and force of rhetoric.
Edit: He wants a debate? Seriously?
"Your policy on x is flawed! It'll waste taxpayer dollars!"
"And what's your policy?"
"I... er... um..."
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
Don't do it, for all our sake!
What the fuck.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
Fixed. Christ do I hate how Abbott speaks.
I was a vote counter for Higgins. The Greens did very well all considering. The climate change denial independent didn't do half bad either (:?). Conservative as fuck seat though. I don't think it's ever been held by a non-liberal. Sigh. Politics just makes me depressed. People I like in other senses can turn themselves into raging cockheads when it comes to politics.
You get depressed, then you find out there is a Australian Sex Party.
Then you realize everything is going to be alright...oh yeah. Wow chicka wow-wow.
As he damn well should do.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
I too, would like to know more about this group.
Not that it matters, I'm in Bradfield.
I looked up the Pirate Party forums but it looks like they're a bunch of tweens who have no idea what the fuck they're really doing. It's like if D&D made a naive attempt at forming a political party.
Equal Rights
R18+ for games
removing all the silly bitch nanny regulation
What I would really really like:
English education for immigrants and refugees, giving them an easier time in Australia
Making prison, particularly juvenile detention centers, a harsher place. Not cruel, but I have a friend who went to juvie and he says it was the most comfortable week of his life.
And bringing automotive production to australia, reducing importing has an excellent effect on greenhouse emissions, those old iron freighters are a goddamn disaster, and this brings us jobs
That, and there's been a general trend towards major parties moving more centrist, in england, and recently in Australia. When Kernot moved to the Labor party it kinda highlighted the end of the centrist party as a force in Australia.
I guess Labor right in the eighties meant Paul Keating, who was still pretty radical (But starting to get central). Nowadays Labor Right can mean Kevin Rudd. Kind of like how little L Liberal now means Turnbull who is pretty palatable compared to Liberal men of past..
That said, the whole increasing centrism of the major parties is pretty good.
Turnbull was my favorite prominant Liberal in quite a while. He copped an astounding amount of shit from the media, some of it deserved of course, but I genuinely liked the direction he was taking the liberals (and escpecially his hard-line attitude against the more batshit members at times). Even as a pinko lefty, I've always thought that a strong, fair, conservative party is an important force in good politics, and I really felt as though Turnbull was providing that.
I assume Abbot (quite truly one of my most hated public figures) becoming leader is some sort of universal yin-yang balancing act, designed to suck away any sense of warmth I was beginning to develop for the Liberal party.
If you ask me, which you didn't (;)) I would say I agree. But worse.
Abbott seems to think: "Well, Howard was in forever, so lets emulate Howard and totally embrace the Howard legacy." Which stinks for two reasons.
One, is that the Howard years were a backlash against thirteen years of Labor. And the Rudd years are a backlash against 11 years of cold hard liberal rule. Which is why with Rudd being who he is, you can't BEAT that was Cold hard Liberalism.
Two, that Howard was an immensely talented politician who knew exactly how to work an electorate. Abbott is not this. Abbott is a right wing knob. Howard was good, because while he was fairly right wing he wasn't batshit crazy rightwing. Abbott is to Howard as Nathan Hauritz is to Shane Warne.
I hear you. I never liked Howard's policies. Workchoices was horrible, his refugee policy was bad - in general I found his policies to be uncaring and biased to the upper class. Still though, even then it was hard not to see the political skill he possessed. He knows how to lead, he was intelligent and most of my differences with him probably came down to a fundamental difference in philosophy. Compared to the leaders that Labor were putting up (especially that one :rotate:), he was just flat out on another level. I could have see myself voting for a Howard government if some of the more conservative elements of his policy could have been revoked (though that might say more about the complete lack of Labor competence during the period).
Abbott is not this. I hate Abbott with a passion. He was precisely the kind of liberal I thought would be outsted and gone with the ending of the Howard era. Instead he manages to displace the moderate Turnbull and somehow ends up as fucking leader. Words could not describe my shock when I heard it on the radio. I was flabbergasted.
Now both major parties are led by religious nutjobs.
edit: Turnbull's blog was pretty fun, too. I could watch him heckle all summer.
His sniping at Tony hopefully means he'll stick around.
Heres the article.
Annabell Crabb is always funny, assuming she's the SMH's political lulz columnist that I'm always reading. I think she is, anyway.
e: Abbott wearing the same tie today as he did when he became opposition leader. I like that tie. Light blue with white and black stripes. Very nice tie.
Yeah, she's just made the switch to the ABC. Probably sensible; I wouldn't want to be sharing page space with Gerard Henderson and Miranda Devine. The stupid might be contagious.
Yeah, we're kinda screwy in that our Free Trade and Protectionist parties merged. It's a kinda of nonsense argument, it's like saying that the Labor Party should break between the Social Conservatives and the Socialists. It's not going to happen, people just seem to think this is a bright idea when the party's suffering post election loss in-fighting. I mean, it's not really a nonsense argument per se. Why shouldn't they separate? Two party preferred voting is why they shouldn't separate. And meddling with that would me more trouble then it is worth. A break away party (Say, Liberals and Conservitives) would only end up having to unite to form a coalition to hold government meaning that nothing would change. The current political parties have institutionalized too much to do anything.
I could see myself voting for a fiscally conservative Labor party member, but my sitting member is a hardcore socialist. Should I therefore suggest that the Hardcore socialist go off and form the Australian Marxist Party Of Tasmania? No. Not really. Just as the Labor Party has to deal with its socialist wing the Liberal Party has to deal with the hardcore nuts.
seems to be how it works everywhere
I don't know yet which irony I want to strike Miranda Devine, but I hope one of them does.
I also see that Tasmania's gift to Question Time isn't sitting next year, as she drinks and drives and her boyfriend assaults her. With out making light of a serious subject, that is so Tasmanian.
edit: this one
The "Cheer squad" got moved from behind Kevin Rudd and the Tasmanian Press asked "Is she out of favour?!?!"
Labor said no no no, we just like to move it around.
By the way don't turn up next time. We'll find someone else.