3 advantages for Katter of ostensibly supporting the Coalition:

1. (obviously) The people in Nth QL who preferred Coalition>Labor won't "skin him alive"; and those who preferred Labor got the result they wanted anyway and will come to understand point 2.

2. He can now support various Labor policies and flame various Coalition policies without looking like a Labor toady.

3. In the event of, eg, a by-election and a challenge to form government: If he decides to support Labor he can argue his independent cred based on his 2010 Coalition support.


Reasons to suspect he might be happy that Labor won:

- He said he would have chosen Labor if Rudd had been the PM; yet he said his decision was made on the basis of his objective 20 points.

- His press conference was squeezed in once he knew how the other 2 would vote. His final reasoning seemed to me quite incoherent/all over the place.

- He seems to like Gillard and Swan and I've seen no reason to think that after spending 2 nights with Kevin Rudd's family that he significantly lost trust in them after Rudd's 'armtwisting'.

- If the make-or-break for him was the mining tax+carbon price why did he say he would have supported Rudd who's mining tax proposal was higher?


longweekend referred to an interview where he said Katter said the make-or-break issue was pork-barrelling. I couldn't find that but if anyone knows where it is please post it.

Yes, I'd say he's happy. He didn't have the spine to backup his own beliefs. This way he gets to stay friends with the lib/nats and his constituent.

He knew the other 2 were going with labor so it was no skin off his nose anyway.

Exactly!

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 12:35pm:

Yes, I'd say he's happy. He didn't have the spine to backup his own beliefs. This way he gets to stay friends with the lib/nats...

I suspect that, and true - that's a 4th reason for choosing the Coalition.

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 12:35pm:

Yes, I'd say he's happy. He didn't have the spine to backup his own beliefs. This way he gets to stay friends with the lib/nats and his constituent. He knew the other 2 were going with labor so it was no skin off his nose anyway.

HE DID HAVE THE SPINE TO BACK HIS BELEIFS

AND HE DID WHAT HIS CONSTITUENT WANTED

UNLIKE THE OTHER TWO

FFS >:(

bwood1946 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 12:48pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 12:35pm: Yes, I'd say he's happy. He didn't have the spine to backup his own beliefs. This way he gets to stay friends with the lib/nats and his constituent. He knew the other 2 were going with labor so it was no skin off his nose anyway. HE DID HAVE THE SPINE TO BACK HIS BELEIFS AND HE DID WHAT HIS CONSTITUENT WANTED UNLIKE THE OTHER TWO FFS >:(

The best argument for that I can think of (apart from supporting his constituents pref.) is his opposition to the mining tax and a carbon price, but taking into account the points above, and his near-comprehensive indictment of the Coalition's past rural policies during the campaign, I tend to doubt that was his make-or-break.

bwood1946 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 12:48pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 12:35pm: Yes, I'd say he's happy. He didn't have the spine to backup his own beliefs. This way he gets to stay friends with the lib/nats and his constituent. He knew the other 2 were going with labor so it was no skin off his nose anyway. HE DID HAVE THE SPINE TO BACK HIS BELEIFS AND HE DID WHAT HIS CONSTITUENT WANTED UNLIKE THE OTHER TWO FFS >:(

PS I respect if an Independent decides in a case like this that the preference of his constituents is his make-or-break factor.

bwood1946 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 12:48pm:

Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 12:35pm: Yes, I'd say he's happy. He didn't have the spine to backup his own beliefs. This way he gets to stay friends with the lib/nats and his constituent. He knew the other 2 were going with labor so it was no skin off his nose anyway. HE DID HAVE THE SPINE TO BACK HIS BELEIFS AND HE DID WHAT HIS CONSTITUENT WANTED UNLIKE THE OTHER TWO FFS >:(

You mean like after he was safe from having to make a real decision? That's why he had to get to the media first to make it LOOK like a decision. He played the safest hand he could...if nothing else have to admire that political savy.

I think Bob is happy Labor won. He hates the Nats, you know! He has been appreciative of the fact the Rudd govt spent more in his electorate in 3 years than Howard did in 12. He did describe himself as the “last socialist in Parliament.”

I was surprised he supported the braindead coalition that includes the Nats who he hates. I think things got a bit too much, all the detailed policy considerations and data to take in. he would be one indie i do not think will get re-elected.

His support is lukewarm anyway, won’t vote in No Confidence motions brought by Opus Dei, I mean by Tony Abbort, errr Abbott, the meber for Cardinal Pell, errrr Waringah!

Darwin wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 3:55pm:

He did describe himself as the “last socialist in Parliament.” I was surprised he supported the braindead coalition that includes the Nats who he hates. I think things got a bit too much, all the detailed policy considerations and data to take in. he would be one indie i do not think will get re-elected. His support is lukewarm anyway, won’t vote in No Confidence motions brought by Opus Dei, I mean by Tony Abbort, errr Abbott, the meber for Cardinal Pell, errrr Waringah!

I think he was quoting Keating with the "socialist" remark.

I thought he was very popular in his electorate?

Katter is Catholic but I don't think it's an Opus Dei conspiracy :D

bwood1946 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 12:48pm:

HE DID HAVE THE SPINE TO BACK HIS BELEIFS AND HE DID WHAT HIS CONSTITUENT WANTED UNLIKE THE OTHER TWO FFS >:(

He is a Independent not tied to any political party that is what you libs and nats can not get through your heads .. The people in his electorate voted for him if they wanted a lib or a nat they would of voted that way ... He didn't have the balls to follow his convictions as a true Independent

He so forgot what the libs and nats did to him and other ex nationals

Binary Ninja wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 5:05pm:

bwood1946 wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 12:48pm: HE DID HAVE THE SPINE TO BACK HIS BELEIFS AND HE DID WHAT HIS CONSTITUENT WANTED UNLIKE THE OTHER TWO FFS >:( He is a Independent not tied to any political party that is what you libs and nats can not get through your heads .. The people in his electorate voted for him if they wanted a lib or a nat they would of voted that way ... He didn't have the balls to follow his convictions as a true Independent He so forgot what the libs and nats did to him and other ex nationals

So the other two "Independents" had the "balls" to go against their electorate........and be bribed by The Welsh Witch.......that's what you and your comrades on here cannot get through your heads......

you do not get it ....they are independents why are they going against their electorate it they choose a side .. he is not labor , he is not national , he is not liberal

their is now proof the electorate are upset with the 2 now

Binary Ninja wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 5:21pm:

you do not get it ....they are independents why are they going against their electorate it they choose a side .. he is not labor , he is not national , he is not liberal their is now proof the electorate are upset with the 2 now

You poor leftards were are you brains The reason they are called inderpendents is because thats what they, And they get voted in for that reason


SO SUCK THAT UP  :D :D :D :D :D

Binary Ninja wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 5:21pm:

you do not get it ....they are independents why are they going against their electorate it they choose a side .. he is not labor , he is not national , he is not liberal their is now proof the electorate are upset with the 2 now

No, you do not get it.......they were elected on the values they promoted to the people who voted for them.......they are answerable to those people.......and yes you are correct, there is indeed "proof" that their electorate is unhappy with the choice they have made.

Well he was elected to represent Kennedy .. in opposition he wont be able to do squat for his electorate they even know this  ... if he actually sided with the other indi's and with labor he would of got a deal for Kennedy been in government and maybe might of brokered more for his area ... If i was a voter in his electorate this would be my concern what can you do for us ...

As a indi they cant and don't have a mandate to govern on their own the only way it works is being on the side that is in government and hoping they listen and implement policies ..

If his electorate wanted a national member or liberal member just vote for them

Del_has_returned wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 5:16pm:

The Welsh Witch

;D

The Welsh Witch will be casting spells on the abbotts and hockeys and turning pyne straight

Del_has_returned wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 5:33pm:

Binary Ninja wrote on Sep 9th, 2010 at 5:21pm: you do not get it ....they are independents why are they going against their electorate it they choose a side .. he is not labor , he is not national , he is not liberal their is now proof the electorate are upset with the 2 now No, you do not get it.......they were elected on the values they promoted to the people who voted for them.......they are answerable to those people.......and yes you are correct, there is indeed "proof" that their electorate is unhappy with the choice they have made.

and to be elected next time, they have to prove that the choice they made was in the best interest of their electorate.

Deborahmac09 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2010 at 7:12pm:

and to be elected next time, they have to prove that the choice they made was in the best interest of their electorate.

The 2 indi's are doing the best for theirs based on what they have secured for their areas  and hence why i think Katter should of taken the deal .. he let his electorate down by not doing the most or best he could for it... it isn't like it wasn't offered ..