I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon:

Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away?

You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best?

But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one.

You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all.

I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it.

Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it.

Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about.

As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does.

Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away?



its a bit hard to remember as soooo much has happened since..

but didnt rudd get assassinated for fear of losing after massive losses at the polls..I am not sure how much Abbott had to do wth rudds demise... from memory it was nothing.

GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 2:48am:

I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon: Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away? You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best? But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one. You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all. I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it. Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it. Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about. As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does.

silly question. You are just asking a loaded question to try and get the answer you want. maybe a better question should be 'should govts be permitted to introduce major policy over their massive rejection of the people and which they promised not to do.'

Is that sufficiently biased for you?

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 6:19pm:

GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 2:48am: I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon: Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away? You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best? But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one. You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all. I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it. Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it. Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about. As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does. silly question. You are just asking a loaded question to try and get the answer you want. maybe a better question should be 'should govts be permitted to introduce major policy over their massive rejection of the people and which they promised not to do.' Is that sufficiently biased for you?

EDIT: Double post.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 6:19pm:

GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 2:48am: I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon: Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away? You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best? But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one. You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all. I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it. Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it. Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about. As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does. silly question. You are just asking a loaded question to try and get the answer you want. maybe a better question should be 'should govts be permitted to introduce major policy over their massive rejection of the people and which they promised not to do.' Is that sufficiently biased for you?

Yes LW, because if there's anyone on this forum that knows about loaded questions, it's you.

Just because you struggle to answer it, doesn't make it a loaded question. It just makes you short sighted.

As for your statement, it is significantly biased, because I don't see you criticizing Howard for STILL believing in Workchoices even after it lost him an election by a landslide.

Quote:

My NBN rant

by Goddyofoz

Rant, you rant all the time goddylocks and sometimes you dont make sense at all, but I guess i shouldnt take it personaly, its only just a symptom of being a leftie.  ;D ;D

GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 7:12pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 6:19pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 2:48am: I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon: Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away? You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best? But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one. You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all. I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it. Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it. Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about. As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does. silly question. You are just asking a loaded question to try and get the answer you want. maybe a better question should be 'should govts be permitted to introduce major policy over their massive rejection of the people and which they promised not to do.' Is that sufficiently biased for you? Yes LW, because if there's anyone on this forum that knows about loaded questions, it's you. Just because you struggle to answer it, doesn't make it a loaded question. It just makes you short sighted. As for your statement, it is significantly biased, because I don't see you criticizing Howard for STILL believing in Workchoices even after it lost him an election by a landslide.

That comment explains so much about what is wrong with Labor. Howard was a CONVICTION politician; someone who believed passionately in his policies and beliefs. What does Gillard beleive in besides remaining in power? The only convictions Labor has are CRIMINAL convictions. And it has plenty of them!

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 8:29pm:

GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 7:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 6:19pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 2:48am: I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon: Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away? You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best? But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one. You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all. I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it. Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it. Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about. As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does. silly question. You are just asking a loaded question to try and get the answer you want. maybe a better question should be 'should govts be permitted to introduce major policy over their massive rejection of the people and which they promised not to do.' Is that sufficiently biased for you? Yes LW, because if there's anyone on this forum that knows about loaded questions, it's you. Just because you struggle to answer it, doesn't make it a loaded question. It just makes you short sighted. As for your statement, it is significantly biased, because I don't see you criticizing Howard for STILL believing in Workchoices even after it lost him an election by a landslide. That comment explains so much about what is wrong with Labor. Howard was a CONVICTION politician; someone who believed passionately in his policies and beliefs. What does Gillard beleive in besides remaining in power? The only convictions Labor has are CRIMINAL convictions. And it has plenty of them!

Howard learnt the hard way that noone cares about your convictions when you're screwing Australia's entire working class.

But you wouldn't apply that logic to patron saint Howard. Only to Gillard.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 8:29pm:

GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 7:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 6:19pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 2:48am: I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon: Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away? You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best? But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one. You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all. I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it. Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it. Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about. As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does. silly question. You are just asking a loaded question to try and get the answer you want. maybe a better question should be 'should govts be permitted to introduce major policy over their massive rejection of the people and which they promised not to do.' Is that sufficiently biased for you? Yes LW, because if there's anyone on this forum that knows about loaded questions, it's you. Just because you struggle to answer it, doesn't make it a loaded question. It just makes you short sighted. As for your statement, it is significantly biased, because I don't see you criticizing Howard for STILL believing in Workchoices even after it lost him an election by a landslide. That comment explains so much about what is wrong with Labor. Howard was a CONVICTION politician; someone who believed passionately in his policies and beliefs. What does Gillard beleive in besides remaining in power? The only convictions Labor has are CRIMINAL convictions. And it has plenty of them!

Nice angle, it's my defence of Keating.

I don't think workchoices is the best choice, gun buy back would be a better example.
Get more support anyway ;)

GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18^th, 2011 at 8:57pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 8:29pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 7:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 6:19pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 2:48am: I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon: Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away? You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best? But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one. You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all. I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it. Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it. Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about. As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does. silly question. You are just asking a loaded question to try and get the answer you want. maybe a better question should be 'should govts be permitted to introduce major policy over their massive rejection of the people and which they promised not to do.' Is that sufficiently biased for you? Yes LW, because if there's anyone on this forum that knows about loaded questions, it's you. Just because you struggle to answer it, doesn't make it a loaded question. It just makes you short sighted. As for your statement, it is significantly biased, because I don't see you criticizing Howard for STILL believing in Workchoices even after it lost him an election by a landslide. That comment explains so much about what is wrong with Labor. Howard was a CONVICTION politician; someone who believed passionately in his policies and beliefs. What does Gillard beleive in besides remaining in power? The only convictions Labor has are CRIMINAL convictions. And it has plenty of them! Howard learnt the hard way that noone cares about your convictions when you're screwing Australia's entire working class. But you wouldn't apply that logic to patron saint Howard. Only to Gillard.

He was PM for 12 years. that pretty much proves MY Point - not yours.

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 7:56am:

GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 8:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 8:29pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 7:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 6:19pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 2:48am: I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon: Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away? You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best? But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one. You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all. I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it. Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it. Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about. As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does. silly question. You are just asking a loaded question to try and get the answer you want. maybe a better question should be 'should govts be permitted to introduce major policy over their massive rejection of the people and which they promised not to do.' Is that sufficiently biased for you? Yes LW, because if there's anyone on this forum that knows about loaded questions, it's you. Just because you struggle to answer it, doesn't make it a loaded question. It just makes you short sighted. As for your statement, it is significantly biased, because I don't see you criticizing Howard for STILL believing in Workchoices even after it lost him an election by a landslide. That comment explains so much about what is wrong with Labor. Howard was a CONVICTION politician; someone who believed passionately in his policies and beliefs. What does Gillard beleive in besides remaining in power? The only convictions Labor has are CRIMINAL convictions. And it has plenty of them! Howard learnt the hard way that noone cares about your convictions when you're screwing Australia's entire working class. But you wouldn't apply that logic to patron saint Howard. Only to Gillard. He was PM for 12 years. that pretty much proves MY Point - not yours.

Mostly by accident, but lets not worry about facts.

GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 9:31am:

longweekend58 wrote on Jul 19th, 2011 at 7:56am: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 8:57pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 8:29pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 7:12pm: longweekend58 wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 6:19pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Jul 18th, 2011 at 2:48am: I have a very serious question for Abbotts bandwagon: Do you think any government should stop governing and stop implementing policy, simply because the polls suggest they look destined to lose the next election, due some 2 years away? You same people who call the NBN business plan “assumptions”, want to assume the result of the next election and have the current government stop governing? Did your hero John Howard stop governing when the polls were dire at best? But who would ever have thunk it, eh…? Well myself for one. You few vocal anti-NBNers “don’t care”, as long as the other political party get in. Exactly as I have been saying all along, it’s just politics to you. Again in my opinion, you aren’t anti-NBN/pro-alternative; you are simply anti-Labor/pro-Coalition, which makes you completely anti-NBN by default. The most recent comments coming from diehards like Maqqa "I don't support death threats BUT" pretty much says it all. I reiterate, if the NBN was Coalition policy, I would still be here lauding it and ironically, you would be here agreeing with me, and don't waste your time Bullsh!tting me because you know it. Look that’s cool, that's fine, you're entitled to voicing your opposition, but just be honest and upfront and say, you are unable to support the NBN (unless it's Coalition policy) because of your political allegiances/subserviency and be done with it. Stop trying to justify your political bias (even admitted to in the past by some members, so I am not making unfounded accusations) with BS and passing off incorrect data you have no smacking idea about. As I've pointed out, the Coalition seems to be sitting pretty and destined to form government. "However", Tony Abbott is no more popular than the most unpopular majority Labor government/PM ever (according to a radio report I heard, and even the Australian suggests he has more people dissatisfied then satisfied). As such I would suggest that until the Coalition bites the bullet and replaces him and then comes up with clear policy alternatives, rather than forever relying simply upon, "vote for us because this government sucks", then those d!ckheads don’t deserve to govern any more than the present does. silly question. You are just asking a loaded question to try and get the answer you want. maybe a better question should be 'should govts be permitted to introduce major policy over their massive rejection of the people and which they promised not to do.' Is that sufficiently biased for you? Yes LW, because if there's anyone on this forum that knows about loaded questions, it's you. Just because you struggle to answer it, doesn't make it a loaded question. It just makes you short sighted. As for your statement, it is significantly biased, because I don't see you criticizing Howard for STILL believing in Workchoices even after it lost him an election by a landslide. That comment explains so much about what is wrong with Labor. Howard was a CONVICTION politician; someone who believed passionately in his policies and beliefs. What does Gillard beleive in besides remaining in power? The only convictions Labor has are CRIMINAL convictions. And it has plenty of them! Howard learnt the hard way that noone cares about your convictions when you're screwing Australia's entire working class. But you wouldn't apply that logic to patron saint Howard. Only to Gillard. He was PM for 12 years. that pretty much proves MY Point - not yours. Mostly by accident, but lets not worry about facts.

no one gets to be PM by accident. certainly noone wins 4 elections on the trot by accident.  try again.