JC Political Thread - For All Things Political Part 2

[Crisis63]

The Liberal party are currently in a very dangerous position. To assume they will romp home based on the negative sentiment of the ALP is stupid. They do have the opportunity to start rolling out good policy on contentious issues and show they have the skill required to manage Australia effectively. IMO they should take a leaf out of the current NZ John Key. He has been very effective in placing himself above the typical partisan crap. He promised and delivered which is very different to the excuses we seem to get here in Australia.

Such leadership from either side would nearly guarantee their election.

Reaper

Indeed. It is definitely time to start to show us why we should vote for them as opposed to why we shouldn’t vote for Labor. Not to do so would be not only a disservice to their party but also run the risk of again delivering a hung parliament.

 

[Reaper]

I think a hung parliament is highly unlikely whichever way the election falls.

Reaper

 

[DAKSTER]

The last newspoll had the coalition ahead on TPP 54-46. They have smashed labor in every Newspoll in recent times to the point where the labor hierarchy were all doing cartwheels through parliament house when one poll saw libs drop to around 52-48 or something in the TPP (which was still within normal poll to poll variance).

Your comment of "they cant win and they know it" is completely absurd. If there was an election tomorrow Tony Abbott would become prime minister in a landslide. Of course there is still time for labor to turn things around but on recent form I know which horse I'm backing.

Labour are making gains and the libs lost their way ages ago. With Abbot at the helm, I dont believe they can defeat Gillard. She has given him plenty of opportunities to make the most of, but he just blows any gains he makes politically, and people are seeing the person he really is. If they change leaders, they will make major gains. Most people I know who DONT vote libs would consider doing so if he wasnt there. That includes me.

 

[minux]

Labour are making gains and the libs lost their way ages ago. With Abbot at the helm, I dont believe they can defeat Gillard. She has given him plenty of opportunities to make the most of, but he just blows any gains he makes politically, and people are seeing the person he really is. If they change leaders, they will make major gains. Most people I know who DONT vote libs would consider doing so if he wasnt there. That includes me.

See thats where our opinions differ, all Labor voters I know vote for who is leading (as you made clear in the post above). They talk about how people won't vote for abbott. Funny thing is, all liberal voters I know vote for a party regardless of who is leading it.

Labor are toxic and will be wiped out at the next election no matter if Abbott is leading the party or if Louis the Fly leads it. Heck even the in house Labor Liberal Malcom Turncoat could lead the LNP to victory. WHat many people forget is Abbott took turncoats party ratings from dire straits to a MASSIVE election winning poll lead. That in itself is pretty impressive. Gillard has done the opposite, she has decimated the leads the ALP had through poor policy and very bad decision making within her party....the cattle trade fiasco comes to mind and it is stinging us badly now.

Those who claim they don't vote libs but would vote for someone else leading the party will never vote libs. Lets face it, Abbott has the potential to be a "human" leader, I mean, how many charities and community services does Gillard support/do? She is not part of the CFA/CFS, she wouldnt have a clue about surf lifesaving, doubt you will see her doing a charity marathon or a charity bike ride, cannot remember when I saw her take time away from Parliament to spend time in indigenous communities WITHOUT cameras...yep our PM is a stand up lass and Tony Abbott is just so damned evil...

 

[Reaper]

Labour are making gains and the libs lost their way ages ago. With Abbot at the helm, I dont believe they can defeat Gillard. She has given him plenty of opportunities to make the most of, but he just blows any gains he makes politically, and people are seeing the person he really is. If they change leaders, they will make major gains. Most people I know who DONT vote libs would consider doing so if he wasnt there. That includes me.

WTF are you talking about? The 2 party preferred vote according to Newspoll (reasonably representative of all the pollsters) had Labor at a 52/48 lead over the Liberals when he took over as leader. By the end of may it was down to 51/49 and the ALP got scared, knifing Rudd a few weeks later. August was 50/50 which pretty much carried thru to the election which with hindsight was bang on prediction. November had them swinging back and forwards between Lib 50 - 52%/ALP 48 - 50%. 2011 saw Abbot move clear with around 56 - 57% over ALP 43 - 44%. I'm not sure what gains you are talking about. Personal popularity has ebbed and flowed for both (mainly ebbed in Gillards case) but the 2 party vote trend is undeniable.

See thats where our opinions differ, all Labor voters I know vote for who is leading (as you made clear in the post above). They talk about how people won't vote for abbott. Funny thing is, all liberal voters I know vote for a party regardless of who is leading it.

Labor are toxic and will be wiped out at the next election no matter if Abbott is leading the party or if Louis the Fly leads it. Heck even the in house Labor Liberal Malcom Turncoat could lead the LNP to victory. WHat many people forget is Abbott took turncoats party ratings from dire straits to a MASSIVE election winning poll lead. That in itself is pretty impressive. Gillard has done the opposite, she has decimated the leads the ALP had through poor policy and very bad decision making within her party....the cattle trade fiasco comes to mind and it is stinging us badly now.

The ALP do have some good policies and ideas but are just beyond incompetent when it comes to process and implementing them. I still maintain that some of the programs during the GFC such as subsidized home insulation were good, only to be derailed completely by woeful execution. Other ideas such as the free money fiasco were just stupid. The blame for all of this lies squarely with the ALP with Gillard and Swan who made up 1/2 of the "gang of 4" who ran things back then being 2 of the chief instigators.

Those who claim they don't vote libs but would vote for someone else leading the party will never vote libs.

Very true. Goes for both sides of politics as well.

Lets face it, Abbott has the potential to be a "human" leader, I mean, how many charities and community services does Gillard support/do? She is not part of the CFA/CFS, she wouldnt have a clue about surf lifesaving, doubt you will see her doing a charity marathon or a charity bike ride, cannot remember when I saw her take time away from Parliament to spend time in indigenous communities WITHOUT cameras...yep our PM is a stand up lass and Tony Abbott is just so damned evil...

I have no idea how many charities Gillard supports or whatever. TBH I have far more respect for those who do it anonymously rather than to hit the headlines. Kerry Packer was a champion of this. I will tip my lid to Abbot who is an excellent example of being able to hold down a (nearly) 24/7 job, yet still find time to exercise and live a healthy lifestyle. Makes the "i'm too busy" line a total crock for being fat.

Reaper

 

[Full Spectrum]

by the sign stating 'speed at your own risk' they are no longer prohibiting speeding, which opens all sorts of legal issues for the govt.

That's the problem now a days everyone's ready to take legal action when in the wrong.

How about a genuine approach to road safety? One where the actual dangerous drivers, the ones who show up as the cause of serious accidents are targeted. People travelling 5 – 10 ks over the prescribed limit are of little consequence to road safety. Especially with the rationale behind the placement and distribution of the limits. While I understand there must be standard limits and they can be arguably applied to various areas based on mostly subjective rationale, policing them with such vehemence smack of only one thing.
SAPOLs own website claim 60% of serious accidents occur on country roads. If speed cameras do “save lives” then why then aren’t 605 of them on country roads?

Well its true that people only speed where they don't know or think a speed camera might be. And up country way the roads are so tight at such speeds. And to think we have freeways here with 4 lanes either side and because one small section is blocked off we are ask to do 40-60-80. Yet country driving is more dangerous.

Speed camera might actually make good money on country roads as everyone likes to relax and turn up the volume. But i get what you mean speed camera's are local where more cars are but less speeding deaths.

 

[minux]

Who was it that uttered the words, another boat another policy failure?

Where all the people who claimed John Howard was evil when it come to boat people? Where are they now when so many are being lured to their deaths? ####ing bunch of hypocritical wankers.

Hundreds missing in asylum boat sinking off Indonesia | News.com.au

 

[tonza]

Who was it that uttered the words, another boat another policy failure?

Where all the people who claimed John Howard was evil when it come to boat people? Where are they now when so many are being lured to their deaths? ####ing bunch of hypocritical wankers.

Hundreds missing in asylum boat sinking off Indonesia | News.com.au

It was wrecked off the coast of Indonesia yes? Don't see why we should get involved/care, or why it must become our problem. Sure the boat was headed here, but it wrecked off their coast. Let it be indonesia's problem.
Honestly Howards policy was great. If it ain't broke, why fix it. Top work Labour, ya douches

 

[Rufys]

Some of these are priceless!

Mark Knight Cartoons - 2011 Herald Sun

 

[Calaber]

Well, the asylum issue is becoming an even bigger circus. Gillard and Co. have finally relented and indicated they will include Nauru in their thinking. Good, that should have settled it then, but ah, no - the Libs want to dig in and refuse to include Malaysia until it become a UNHCR signatory,which is pretty unlikely.

In my opinion, this is one that Tony will lose. The public wants a solution to this problem and grandstanding on the basis of Liberal policy is not the way to get it. He has beaten the drum about Nauru for years and when he finally gets the government to recognise they were wrong, he still won't yield. This one will help Labor more than the Libs if the Libs don't concede.