Is there still time to replace Gillard and for Labor to lift their primary higher than the current 20's before the next election.

If Labor is so set on giving government away with no fight, should they now limit their loses?

Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader?

Dont worry, she will be.

deja vu. I could have sworn we were here just a month ago.

She will be by the end of the year, make no mistake about that. It doesn't matter, Labor are completely stuffed.

rudd, gillard, milne .....

same horse, different rider.

BlOoDy RiPpEr wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:13am:

Dont worry, she will be.

Yes, that is obvious.

Will Labor start planning to still hold on Senators so to force Abbott to a DD. If so, Gillard must go so Labor can stop bleeding support to the coalition and so giving him control of both houses and the right control of most State governments.

The Senate must be protected from Abbott. And Gillard is the weakest link.

While I believe she has never been given a fair go,mostly by the sexist biased Murdoch press and the conga line of conservative suckholes, I cannot see her getting any better numbers than she has.
I believe that is why the NSW right pushed for Carr as foreign minister, if she cant turn things around, which look highly unlikely, I believe Carr will be PM by xmas. Its just a matter of finding a safe seat for him and moving someone on.

skippy. wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:19am:

While I believe she has never been given a fair go,mostly by the sexist biased Murdoch press and the conga line of conservative suckholes, I cannot see her getting any better numbers than she has. I believe that is why the NSW right pushed for Carr as foreign minister, if she cant turn things around, which look highly unlikely, I believe Carr will be PM by xmas. Its just a matter of finding a safe seat for him and moving someone on.

Probably best that idiot shuts his mouth then.

Have made it clear a number of times before and still have the same view.

Steven Smith being promoted as Labor Leader, is Labor's best option to minimise losses to Abbott (and to the Greens)

He is well respected and is not tarred by the current Labor mess.

blob carr PM.. Oh gawd... they are desperate..he hasnt even been elected.. its a hoot really..I am almost sure he aint the most popular person in the party.. what is it they say about the scum always coming to the top??

they have no choice but to stick with gillard..they have elected her twice now..and changing  the guard isnt working it didnt work for NSW it wont work for the Feds..

has she said anything about booby retiring????

handbags at dawn...

____ wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:26am:

Have made it clear a number of times before and still have the same view. Steven Smith being promoted as Labor Leader, is Labor's best option to minimise losses to Abbott (and to the Greens) He is well respected and is not tarred by the current Labor mess.

I like Smith, but I doubt he is PM material.
Carr is not tarnished, neither is Crean, both have cred, Crean in particular as "old Labor". A new leader is what Labor need to take away the sexist feeling against Gillard, shown here by the likes of sprint and armchair politician,and definitely an issue in the rightard community. The rightards are never going to support Labor anyway, so posters here against Labor are irrelevant, its the old labor voters and swingers Labor need to attract back, Crean or Carr would be the best for that.

skippy. wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:32am:

____ wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:26am: Have made it clear a number of times before and still have the same view. Steven Smith being promoted as Labor Leader, is Labor's best option to minimise losses to Abbott (and to the Greens) He is well respected and is not tarred by the current Labor mess. I like Smith, but I doubt he is PM material. Carr is not tarnished, neither is Crean, both have cred, Crean in particular as "old Labor". A new leader is what Labor need to take away the sexist feeling against Gillard, shown here by the likes of sprint and armchair politician,and definitely an issue in the rightard community. The rightards are never going to support Labor anyway, so posters here against Labor are irrelevant, its the old labor voters and swingers Labor need to attract back, Crean or Carr would be the best for that.

With Carr, someone would have to jump to make way. So out of Carr/Crean. Crean could be promoted quickly. He is also in a currently very safe Labor seat also.

Crean / Smith. Smith may be the person to rebuild Labor by refocusing on lost core values down the track, if required.

carr, crean.and smith.. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D  ;D ;D ;D

throw in Mickey Mouse...and you have another gang of four.

____ wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:12am:

Is there still time to replace Gillard and for Labor to lift their primary higher than the current 20's before the next election. If Labor is so set on giving government away with no fight, should they now limit their loses? Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader?

What good would it do? They are all the same. Whoever is there will do exactly the same thing.

SOB

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:19am: While I believe she has never been given a fair go,mostly by the sexist biased Murdoch press and the conga line of conservative suckholes, I cannot see her getting any better numbers than she has. I believe that is why the NSW right pushed for Carr as foreign minister, if she cant turn things around, which look highly unlikely, I believe Carr will be PM by xmas. Its just a matter of finding a safe seat for him and moving someone on. Probably best that idiot shuts his mouth then.

What seat could he possibly win though? What seat is strong enough to not suffer a severe backlash?

I'd be happy to vote for Crean.

Carr, not so much.

As for the rest of them....no, thanks.

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:48am:

progressiveslol wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:20am: skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:19am: While I believe she has never been given a fair go,mostly by the sexist biased Murdoch press and the conga line of conservative suckholes, I cannot see her getting any better numbers than she has. I believe that is why the NSW right pushed for Carr as foreign minister, if she cant turn things around, which look highly unlikely, I believe Carr will be PM by xmas. Its just a matter of finding a safe seat for him and moving someone on. Probably best that idiot shuts his mouth then. What seat could he possibly win though? What seat is strong enough to not suffer a severe backlash?

Labor have safe seats that would not fall to the coalition under any circumstance, Darrell Melham's for example, and he is the sort that would stand aside for the good of the party.

skippy. wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:54am:

matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:48am: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:20am: skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:19am: While I believe she has never been given a fair go,mostly by the sexist biased Murdoch press and the conga line of conservative suckholes, I cannot see her getting any better numbers than she has. I believe that is why the NSW right pushed for Carr as foreign minister, if she cant turn things around, which look highly unlikely, I believe Carr will be PM by xmas. Its just a matter of finding a safe seat for him and moving someone on. Probably best that idiot shuts his mouth then. What seat could he possibly win though? What seat is strong enough to not suffer a severe backlash? Labor have safe seats that would not fall to the coalition under any circumstance, Darrell Melham's for example, and he is the sort that would stand aside for the good of the party.

He holds Banks by a margin of 1.45%, and lost on the primary vote last election.

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:58am:

skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:54am: matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:48am: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:20am: skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:19am: While I believe she has never been given a fair go,mostly by the sexist biased Murdoch press and the conga line of conservative suckholes, I cannot see her getting any better numbers than she has. I believe that is why the NSW right pushed for Carr as foreign minister, if she cant turn things around, which look highly unlikely, I believe Carr will be PM by xmas. Its just a matter of finding a safe seat for him and moving someone on. Probably best that idiot shuts his mouth then. What seat could he possibly win though? What seat is strong enough to not suffer a severe backlash? Labor have safe seats that would not fall to the coalition under any circumstance, Darrell Melham's for example, and he is the sort that would stand aside for the good of the party. He holds Banks by a margin of 1.45%, and lost on the primary vote last election.

So they find a safer seat,mel. If you think every seat is going to fall to the coalition you're handicapped even more than you project. Melham also had a 10% plus swing against him in that election,wont happen again. But seeing you're being the handicapped nuf nuf you are, give Carr Blaxland, that has a 30% plus margin. :-*

Even though Miss Gillard is a pathological liar and is the most hated and most despised pollie in Australia today, it would be a shame to see it go before it has completed its rampant destruction of the Australian economy which it is doing in order to leave the most unholy mess possible for when the Coalition takes over.

From the Coalition's point of view they certainly want to see Miss Gillard stay as "Slime Spinster" right through to the bitter end because Miss Gillard is by far the Coalition's most valuable election asset and Miss Gillard campaigns tirelessly for the Coalition's resounding win in 2013.

No doubt there will be a few feathers flying and a fair bit of hen pecking as Miss Gillard and Senatrix Milne lock beaks particularly with all the new broom syndrome at the Communist Greens home office now that Uncle Bob has cleverly took off before the almighty crash coming in 2013.

Now Skippy, I know you are just bursting to do your blowfly thing and to display your inimitable expertise by copying bits here and there but don't spoil it all by just describing your personal shortcomings because that is just so boring and lowers the standard of the blog site.

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:18am:

She will be by the end of the year, make no mistake about that. It doesn't matter, Labor are completely stuffed.

That's what you and that other dickhead loserweekend were saying a year ago. And every day that passes just makes you two look stoopider and stoopider. So go ahead, keep making the idiot pronouncements.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:45am:

____ wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:12am: Is there still time to replace Gillard and for Labor to lift their primary higher than the current 20's before the next election. If Labor is so set on giving government away with no fight, should they now limit their loses? Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader? What good would it do? They are all the same. Whoever is there will do exactly the same thing. SOB

it's about forcing Abbott to a DD election, if he wins the next election.

Labor is the weakest link in avoiding Abbott controlling both houses and ramming through legislation like workchoices.

Labor in on track on losing enough Senators for Abbott to have control and not requiring a DD.

Greens can pick up some of Labor's loss, yet will it be enough.

Labor must stop their stupidity and pull their weight.

skippy. wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:00am:

matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:58am: skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:54am: matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:48am: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:20am: skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:19am: While I believe she has never been given a fair go,mostly by the sexist biased Murdoch press and the conga line of conservative suckholes, I cannot see her getting any better numbers than she has. I believe that is why the NSW right pushed for Carr as foreign minister, if she cant turn things around, which look highly unlikely, I believe Carr will be PM by xmas. Its just a matter of finding a safe seat for him and moving someone on. Probably best that idiot shuts his mouth then. What seat could he possibly win though? What seat is strong enough to not suffer a severe backlash? Labor have safe seats that would not fall to the coalition under any circumstance, Darrell Melham's for example, and he is the sort that would stand aside for the good of the party. He holds Banks by a margin of 1.45%, and lost on the primary vote last election. So they find a safer seat,mel. If you think every seat is going to fall to the coalition you're handicapped even more than you project.

Astro turd once again showing her ignorance and lack of comprehension skills. Carr will not win any seat if Labor are stupid enough to try anything like this. Shorten or Crean will be there by year's end.

skippy. wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:54am:

matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:48am: progressiveslol wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:20am: skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:19am: While I believe she has never been given a fair go,mostly by the sexist biased Murdoch press and the conga line of conservative suckholes, I cannot see her getting any better numbers than she has. I believe that is why the NSW right pushed for Carr as foreign minister, if she cant turn things around, which look highly unlikely, I believe Carr will be PM by xmas. Its just a matter of finding a safe seat for him and moving someone on. Probably best that idiot shuts his mouth then. What seat could he possibly win though? What seat is strong enough to not suffer a severe backlash? Labor have safe seats that would not fall to the coalition under any circumstance, Darrell Melham's for example, and he is the sort that would stand aside for the good of the party.

There is just a shiteload fewer of them that there ever has been skippy.

Sorry but any party that goes from a landslide win - to 3 years later failing to hold a majority - to 2 years later looking at outright decimation - has only itself to blame.

Not the opposition, not the people and not the media.

Labor have been an outright disaster and this current Government under Gillard just seem to have lurched from one disaster to the next.
Their ability to communicate is beyond poor.

They seem to even stuff up positives. Somehow or another the bringing in of Carr, only a week after defeating Rudd, seemed to be stuffed up with the "I haven't spoken to him, err no actually I have...".
It was all a tad harsh but more highlighted to me they cant seem to get a message out across well at all.

People say that decimations in the end dont usually translate in elections.
I think NSW and QLD may act as a wake up call that if they don't change it - it could actually end up as bad as what is being predicted.

I mean for goodness sake, Labor in QLD would actually lose Party status if the Liberals wanted. Let that be their warning federally - it really could end up this bad.

This is the same message many across the world in many different countries have learned -

You ignore the people and arrogantly take them for granted at your peril.
You can keep in an MP who uses hookers and avoids the police if you like, you can move the speaker into a position, you can do a shady deal with others if you like.

At some point, at some point love, you have to ask the people. Right now their answer will decimate your party.

This will be the 2nd non-attendance by Miss Gillard who stayed away from the recent funeral and now the London Olympics.

Remember how Mark Latham stopped doing official things just before he was booted out ?

Does this really mean that Miss Gillard knows that it will no longer be the PM when the London Olympics start ? This will be a worry for The Coalition.

Olympics boss John Coates furious at PM's decision not to attend London Games
AAP April 15, 2012 2:32PM 12 comments

Not happy: Olympic Committee boss John Coates is disappointed Gillard will be a no-show at the London games. Prime Minister Julia Gillard won't be attending London Games. Snub has left Olympics boss John Coates furious. Coates praised Kevin Rudd for attending Beijing Games.

PRIME Minister Julia Gillard's decision not to attend the London Olympics has raised the ire of Australian Olympic boss John Coates.

Ms Gillard will not attend the summer games in London in July, a move Mr Coates says is disappointing for Australian athletes.

"I thought London would be an absolute must for Julia, so I'm disappointed," he told Fairfax newspapers.

"It's a disappointment to us. It will be a disappointment to our team."

A spokesman for Ms Gillard said prime ministers rarely attend the Olympics.

"This year, as has happened in the past, the Prime Minister will be represented by the sports minister," he said.

Mr Coates is also angered Ms Gillard will not attend the Australian Olympic Committee's June 23 fund-raising event in Melbourne.

The prime minister usually makes the keynote address at the dinner where 1400 guests fork out $22,000 for each table.

Ms Gillard will be attending the G20 leaders meeting and the UN Sustainable Development Conference at the time of the dinner.

"It is crucial that the prime minister make Australia's voice heard at international meetings like these," her spokesman said.

"What John Coates didn't mention was that we offered alternative dates to the AOC - but the AOC turned them down."

Deputy Prime Minister Wayne Swan will represent Ms Gillard at the dinner.

Mr Coates praised former prime minister Kevin Rudd for his decision to attend the Olympics in Beijing, the first PM to do so since Malcolm Fraser in 1976.

"Rudd got it," Mr Coates said.

Australian Republican Movement national director David Morris, a former diplomat recently appointed to the role, said it was fine if the prime minister was too busy to attend the games.

"Attendance at an opening ceremony is far better suited to a head of state," Mr Morris said.

"Such a role should represent the whole nation and not play a partisan role.

Australia's head of state, Queen Elizabeth, would be busy supporting the UK team, Mr Morris said.

"This has been a problem for Australia for some time, with a lack of support for the outdated constitutional link to the UK monarchy but no political will to give the people a choice of alternatives.

"Australia is ready for our own head of state, who will be able to genuinely and warmly shake the hand of the British head of state as an equal and cheer for our team in friendly rivalry."

Opposition frontbencher Christopher Pyne said the non-attendance of the dinner by Ms Gillard was a sign of the chaotic and dysfunctional office she runs.

"A lot of people in Labor are not being able to get their diaries organized or just don't have the commitment either for community cabinet or to the Olympics dinner that you would expect them to have," he told ABC television.

"The prime minister needs to get her office under control."

Comments on this story

Justin Posted at 4:22 PM Today
Julia Knows that she won't be PM by the time the games come around, this is the reason for her non attendance!

Ray of The Basin Posted at 4:13 PM Today
This woman is a global embarrassment

Mrs caroline Yuile of Milperra Posted at 4:05 PM Today
It is very rude of her not to go to the London Games all Prime Minister 's go why are you so special Gillard in not going got something special you can't get out of or just worried about your Leadership if you go someone will fill your shoes while you are gone. What a slap in the face for Australia our Prime Minister not going it is very rude Prime MInister

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/coates-furious-at-pms-olympics-snub/story-e6freuzr-1226326970085

Skippy, you should have a blowfly fit copying bits and snieces out of all this - go fly blowfly

Quote:

Sorry but any party that goes from a landslide win - to 3 years later failing to hold a majority

So you disagree with your mentor, longwhine, that Labors win in 2007 wasn't all that big?????
Good on ya ,mel. :-*
OH sorry, andrei made that post, no wonder it made more sense than any post mel/matty has ever made.

There is no way Labor wants a by-election in ANY Seat. They could find a seat that is unloseable but it will still show a very large swing and they dont want to give the polls and my momentum than they already have.

Gist wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:00am:

matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:18am: She will be by the end of the year, make no mistake about that. It doesn't matter, Labor are completely stuffed. That's what you and that other dickhead loserweekend were saying a year ago. And every day that passes just makes you two look stoopider and stoopider. So go ahead, keep making the idiot pronouncements.

Yes, we're the stupid ones when you can't even spell. Time is ticking, Labor thought that they could turn things around but haven't. It's 57-43 at present, and it isn't going to get much better. I think that it will be much worse once the carbon tax is in operation.

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:12am:

Gist wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:00am: matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:18am: She will be by the end of the year, make no mistake about that. It doesn't matter, Labor are completely stuffed. That's what you and that other dickhead loserweekend were saying a year ago. And every day that passes just makes you two look stoopider and stoopider. So go ahead, keep making the idiot pronouncements. Yes, we're the stupid ones when you can't even spell. Time is ticking, Labor thought that they could turn things around but haven't. It's 57-43 at present, and it isn't going to get much better. I think that it will be much worse once the carbon tax is in operation.

Yet both Howard and Keating were on 57/43 just weeks from elections, AND THEY BOTH WON,MEL.Keep up your stupidity,we all need a good laugh. ;D ;D ;D

skippy. wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:14am:

matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:12am: Gist wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:00am: matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:18am: She will be by the end of the year, make no mistake about that. It doesn't matter, Labor are completely stuffed. That's what you and that other dickhead loserweekend were saying a year ago. And every day that passes just makes you two look stoopider and stoopider. So go ahead, keep making the idiot pronouncements. Yes, we're the stupid ones when you can't even spell. Time is ticking, Labor thought that they could turn things around but haven't. It's 57-43 at present, and it isn't going to get much better. I think that it will be much worse once the carbon tax is in operation. Yet both Howard and Keating were on 57/43 just weeks from elections, AND THEY BOTH WON,MEL.Keep up your stupidity,we all need a good laugh. ;D ;D ;D

The thing is though skippy from my viewpoint is they have been on this level now since her announcement of the carbon tax idea.
It has rarely if ever raised up or looked like coming back.

I hear the argument "it can change" but it seems time is ticking by and there seems absolutely no action plan on how to change it?

Do you agree or am I being harsh?
How can you see it coming back to an election winning position?

skippy. wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:10am:

Quote: Sorry but any party that goes from a landslide win - to 3 years later failing to hold a majority So you disagree with your mentor, longwhine, that Labors win in 2007 wasn't all that big????? Good on ya ,mel. :-* OH sorry, andrei made that post, no wonder it made more sense than any post mel/matty has ever made.

Not sure if you think I do have am mentor on here.
If I do, then my life has taken a serious turn for the worse....

But anyway, yeah I do think the 2007 election win was big.
Which is why the 2010 inability to win a majority of any kind was so poor in my book.

skippy. wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:10am:

Quote: Sorry but any party that goes from a landslide win - to 3 years later failing to hold a majority So you disagree with your mentor, longwhine, that Labors win in 2007 wasn't all that big????? Good on ya ,mel. :-* OH sorry, andrei made that post, no wonder it made more sense than any post mel/matty has ever made.

Rudds win was the second SMALLEST victory in an election that changed govt. It is that simple.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:17am:

skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:14am: matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:12am: Gist wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:00am: matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:18am: She will be by the end of the year, make no mistake about that. It doesn't matter, Labor are completely stuffed. That's what you and that other dickhead loserweekend were saying a year ago. And every day that passes just makes you two look stoopider and stoopider. So go ahead, keep making the idiot pronouncements. Yes, we're the stupid ones when you can't even spell. Time is ticking, Labor thought that they could turn things around but haven't. It's 57-43 at present, and it isn't going to get much better. I think that it will be much worse once the carbon tax is in operation. Yet both Howard and Keating were on 57/43 just weeks from elections, AND THEY BOTH WON,MEL.Keep up your stupidity,we all need a good laugh. ;D ;D ;D The thing is though skippy from my viewpoint is they have been on this level now since her announcement of the carbon tax idea. It has rarely if ever raised up or looked like coming back. I hear the argument "it can change" but it seems time is ticking by and there seems absolutely no action plan on how to change it? Do you agree or am I being harsh? How can you see it coming back to an election winning position?

Andrei, I don't know why you're bothering with too girl. She thrives on attention and specialises in getting pretty much everything. Neither Ketpating nor Howard were ever suffering levels of 43-57, at any point in time.

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 10:27am:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:17am: skippy. wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:14am: matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:12am: Gist wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 10:00am: matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:18am: She will be by the end of the year, make no mistake about that. It doesn't matter, Labor are completely stuffed. That's what you and that other dickhead loserweekend were saying a year ago. And every day that passes just makes you two look stoopider and stoopider. So go ahead, keep making the idiot pronouncements. Yes, we're the stupid ones when you can't even spell. Time is ticking, Labor thought that they could turn things around but haven't. It's 57-43 at present, and it isn't going to get much better. I think that it will be much worse once the carbon tax is in operation. Yet both Howard and Keating were on 57/43 just weeks from elections, AND THEY BOTH WON,MEL.Keep up your stupidity,we all need a good laugh. ;D ;D ;D The thing is though skippy from my viewpoint is they have been on this level now since her announcement of the carbon tax idea. It has rarely if ever raised up or looked like coming back. I hear the argument "it can change" but it seems time is ticking by and there seems absolutely no action plan on how to change it? Do you agree or am I being harsh? How can you see it coming back to an election winning position? Andrei, I don't know why you're bothering with too girl. She thrives on attention and specialises in getting pretty much everything. Neither Ketpating nor Howard were ever suffering levels of 43-57, at any point in time.

You are not very good at lying,mellie, I dont know why you keep it up, because I love to point your lies out.Both Howard AND Keating were on 57/43 AND won elections, but here is Howards last time on 43/57% which he lost. Just posting it up to prove you're a liar,sweety. ;D ;D


Quote:

Pressure is expected to build on John Howard's leadership in Australia in coming days with the latest Sydney Morning Herald/Nielsen poll showing Labor powering ahead of the Coalition and the personal popularity of the Labor leader, Kevin Rudd, soaring to a record high. Senior Coalition sources told the Herald last night a view was forming among some in cabinet to tap Mr Howard on the shoulder in the best interests of the party. "The next 48 hours will be critical," said one senior figure, who added that today's poll would be viewed as pivotal. Mr Howard sent a stern message to nervous colleagues yesterday, saying he was going nowhere. "I do intend to contest [the election], I intend to contest it as leader. That question was settled last year," he said as he wrapped up the successful Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit. Despite Mr Howard's moment on the world's stage, the poll, taken from Thursday to Saturday, shows Labor leading the Coalition on a two-party-preferred basis by 57 per cent to 43 per cent

Thanks for letting me show you up,mel. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

No.

WRITTEN BY SHAMTHEMAN too mellie. ;D ;D
Quote:

JULIA Gillard is in a deep dark political hole, partly of her own making, and the Prime Minister has to dig herself out if she is to have a chance of winning the next election. On the basis of the government's current predicament and standing in the polls it is clear Labor would have no chance of winning an election held any time soon. Of course, the greatest likelihood is that there will no election soon and probably it will be held soon after August 2013. It is also most likely that Gillard will be the leader who takes Labor to that election. Therefore, the biggest question facing the government is whether Gillard can win that election. The short answer to that question is: "Yes, of course she can."For all the despair and the desperation in Labor ranks right now over Gillard's record low personal standing and the challenges ahead it should be remembered all of her predecessors in the past 20 years - except Kevin Rudd - have been in worse positions in the polls. . . . What's more, two of them - Paul Keating and John Howard - went on to win a total of three elections between them after being in a worse personal position than Gillard only months before those elections. Of course it has to be said that Bob Hawke lost his job after hitting a worse position in the polls when his colleagues dumped him and both Keating and Howard lost elections when they were in a similar position to Gillard now. A low primary vote is far more important in losing an election than the leader's personal standing. It is possible for leaders to recover their personal standing with the public after falling to disastrous levels, as Howard did, and win an election just as it is possible for a leader's popularity to remain low and still win an election, as Keating did. Every election is different, every leader has different appeal and every opposition leader plays differently against the prime minister of the day. For Gillard the reassurance in these historical comparisons of Keating winning the unwinnable election and Howard rising Lazarus-like after declaring there would be a GST are qualified by two sobering caveats. The first, and most important, is that while Keating and Howard lifted their personal standings or won elections when their standings remained low, none of Gillard's predecessors had a primary vote as low as hers is now combined with poor personal ratings. Even before Keating lost to Howard in 1996, when the then prime minister's net satisfaction rating was minus-29 per cent and Howard was within four points as preferred prime minister, the ALP's primary vote was 39-40 per cent. Gillard's net satisfaction rating last weekend in Newspoll was minus-25 and the primary vote for Labor was 31 per cent. When the Labor caucus removed Hawke he had a satisfaction rating of minus-31 and the primary vote was 35-37 per cent. Second, analogies about how the carbon tax is a parallel for Howard's GST campaign and Labor's vote will magically restore once it's bedded down just as Howard's did, and that Tony Abbott, like Kim Beazley, is a bad Opposition Leader doomed to fail, are just false. Gillard cannot rely on turning around popular ill will towards the carbon tax by simply implementing it with generous compensation for households and assistance for industry. Gillard's recent warnings to her Labor colleagues that the polls would remain unchanged and bad for "three to four months" are now stretching to the expectation of at least a year to 18 months of bad polling. The reason for such a grim outlook from the Prime Minister is twofold: first she is beseeching her colleagues to maintain discipline for much longer than they previously expected; and, secondly, it's true. While the simple comparison of Howard's GST implementation and Gillard's carbon tax is faulty it is worthwhile to look at Howard's experience introducing a new tax and how he fared in the polls and subsequent elections. In mid 1998 the Coalition was travelling poorly and Howard announced his intention to introduce a GST, after the next election, after previously saying there would "never, ever" be a GST. The impact on Howard in the polls was marked and immediate. He fell behind Beazley as preferred prime minister, had a net satisfaction rating of minus-31, Beazley had positive satisfaction rating of six and the Coalition's primary was between 34 and 37 per cent

OH MAGMELLIE you've done it again. ;D ;D ;D
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/pm-has-time-to-dig-herself-out-of-hole/story-e6frgd0x-1226076661103

Skippy - do you think she can turn it around?

I personally don't think she can.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 11:26am:

Skippy - do you think she can turn it around? I personally don't think she can.

She currently has a primary of 35% ,no worse than Howard or Keating did, so yes she can turn it around, but I don't think she will. It will be up to another Labor leader to do that. The links I've posted up prove it can be done, and is in fact quite normal for a gov to be in this position ,with Hawke, Keating and Howard all being in the same OR WORSE as SHAMTHEMAN points out in the above article. But I think Gillard is spent, not because Labor cant turn it around, because Gillard has never been given a chance from the beginning.

I've been thinking for quite sometime that Gillard will be replaced but not before the carbon tax is bedded down and not before it's too late to replace Abbott. A strategy that may help hold some ground but not avert defeat.

I think Gillard knows this but has not given up hope of building Labor's support to a level where she can be considered a viable leader. I can't help but think her support of Carr might have been partly motivated by a desire to nobble  Smith. Good luck to her.

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 11:26am:

Skippy - do you think she can turn it around? I personally don't think she can.

Andrei, yet another lie, she is not on 35%, she is on 28%, just as neither Keating nor Howard were on 43-57 two weeks before an election.

MOTR wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 12:12pm:

I've been thinking for quite sometime that Gillard will be replaced but not before the carbon tax is bedded down and [url]not before it's too late to replace Abbott.[/url] A strategy that may help hold some ground but not avert defeat. I think Gillard knows this but has not given up hope of building Labor's support to a level where she can be considered a viable leader. I can't help but think her support of Carr might have been partly motivated by a desire to nobble  Smith. Good luck to her.

Please explain the bold part.

As to the rest of your post, Gillard is delusional enough to think that she may win the election, and I don't see how bringing in Carr could keep Smith at bay.

perceptions_now wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 11:08am:

No.

And if it looks more and more likely Abbott will gain both houses because of Labor's continual collapse in primary support?

MOTR wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 12:12pm:

I've been thinking for quite sometime that Gillard will be replaced but not before the carbon tax is bedded down and not before it's too late to replace Abbott. A strategy that may help hold some ground but not avert defeat. I think Gillard knows this but has not given up hope of building Labor's support to a level where she can be considered a viable leader. I can't help but think her support of Carr might have been partly motivated by a desire to nobble  Smith. Good luck to her.

Keeping Smith in Defense, rather than giving him back Foreign Affairs was obviously another attack on him. (As the Afghanistan Defeat comes closer to no longer being denied by Labor and Liberal Parties)

____ wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:12am:

Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader?

No.

Instead, the Australian public should be educated about how elections, and the government, work in this country.

The public do not elect the Prime Minister.

The office of PM is not as important as you think it is (it's not even in the Constitution).

This is not the USA: the POTUS and PM are completely different.

Stop worrying about personalities, and start focusing on policies.

Uncle Meat wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 12:46pm:

____ wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:12am: Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader? No. Instead, the Australian public should be educated about how elections, and the government, work in this country. The public do not elect the Prime Minister. The office of PM is not as important as you think it is (it's not even in the Constitution). This is not the USA: the POTUS and PM are completely different. Stop worrying about personalities, and start focusing on policies.

in theory yes, in practise the ALP "sold" rudd as the next wonderboy.
he failed, as was his history.
it's really a bad inditement agaisnt the whole alp

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 12:35pm:

Andrei.Hicks wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 11:26am: Skippy - do you think she can turn it around? I personally don't think she can. Andrei, yet another lie, she is not on 35%, she is on 28%, just as neither Keating nor Howard were on 43-57 two weeks before an election.

You must feel very embarrassed I've exposed your lies again,mel, embarrassed and stupid. ;D ;D I have to give it to you for being stupid enough to stick by your lies on the very page I've exposed them,ROTFLMAO at ya, mellie. ;D ;D ;D ;D
Actually, I was wrong, and so are you,mellie, Labors  poll number was 32%, here's the link,mellie. ;D ;D
Of course that doesn't change the fact you lied and were wrong about Keating and Howard, why I provided links, to show you up as the liar you are. ;D ;D ;D
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger/

Federal Labor vote near Queensland lows: Newspoll.

MATTHEW FRANKLIN, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT The Australian March 27 2012.


LABOR hopes that voter contempt for its brand is confined to Queensland have been shattered by the latest Newspoll, which shows the party's national support has plunged close to the record lows returned in the weekend's election rout.

The latest Newspoll survey reveals that federal Labor's primary support has dropped three percentage points to 28 per cent in the past fortnight just one point above the 26.9 per cent figure achieved in its devastating loss in Queensland.

With Labor's support now at its lowest point since last September, the Coalition's primary vote has climbed four points to 47 per cent and now sits about three percentage points short of the vote the Queensland Liberal National Party achieved in its victory over Anna Bligh's government.

The Newspoll, conducted exclusively for The Australian over the weekend, reveals voter satisfaction with Julia Gillard improved. However, it also found the Coalition extended its commanding two-party-preferred lead over Labor to 57 per cent against 43 per cent in the fortnight when the Prime Minister successfully pushed the mining tax through the Senate. Two weeks earlier, the Coalition led Labor by 53 per cent to 47 per cent.


The poll, taken across the nation among 925 respondents, emerged yesterday amid an intense debate about whether Labor's Queensland electoral disaster might be repeated in next year's federal election.

With the LNP stripping Labor of 43 seats at the weekend and reducing its parliamentary representation to single figures, former Queensland premier Peter Beattie warned on Sunday that federal Labor must shift course or face annihilation in the northern state in the federal poll.

Labor's primary-vote slide represents the first time its vote has fallen below 30 per cent since October after reaching a record low of 26 per cent in mid-September.

The government's primary vote has plunged seven percentage points in the past month wiping out most of the gains Ms Gillard secured in the final months of last year and the early months of this year.

If the latest Newspoll results were reflected on election day, Labor would be trounced, with its primary vote now 10 percentage points below the support it attracted in the 2010 election, in which it failed to secure a majority of seats in the House of Representatives.

Labor's fall came despite Labor celebrations last week over the March 19 passage of the minerals resource rent tax, set to raise $10.6 billion in its first three years.

Ms Gillard lauded the vote as evidence of her ability to negotiate difficult legislation through the Senate. When questioned about whether she believed she could win Senate approval for proposed business tax cuts to be funded from the MRRT, she told journalists that they frequently "scoffed" at her ability to steer legislation through passage and was entitled to "go (look at the) scoreboard".

The MRRT legislation also included an increase in the superannuation guarantee from 9 per cent to 12 per cent.

While the government celebrated this change, it came under heavy attack from business groups, which said employers would have to bear the $20bn-a-year cost, prompting Superannuation Minister Bill Shorten to declare workers would fund most of the increase through deferred pay rises.

The latest Newspoll found the Greens primary vote stood at 11 per cent down one point from the March 9-11 survey.

Despite Labor's losses, Ms Gillard's personal popularity increased, with voter satisfaction with her performance up three percentage points to 31 per cent as her dissatisfaction rating fell four points to 58 per cent.

Thirty-two per cent of voters were satisfied with Tony Abbott's performance, unchanged from a fortnight earlier, and 58 per cent were dissatisfied.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/federal-labor-vote-near-queensland-lows-newspoll/story-fn59niix-1226310792897

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 1:29pm:

Federal Labor vote near Queensland lows: Newspoll. MATTHEW FRANKLIN, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT The Australian March 27 2012. LABOR hopes that voter contempt for its brand is confined to Queensland have been shattered by the latest Newspoll, which shows the party's national support has plunged close to the record lows returned in the weekend's election rout. The latest Newspoll survey reveals that federal Labor's primary support has dropped three percentage points to 28 per cent in the past fortnight just one point above the 26.9 per cent figure achieved in its devastating loss in Queensland. With Labor's support now at its lowest point since last September, the Coalition's primary vote has climbed four points to 47 per cent and now sits about three percentage points short of the vote the Queensland Liberal National Party achieved in its victory over Anna Bligh's government. The Newspoll, conducted exclusively for The Australian over the weekend, reveals voter satisfaction with Julia Gillard improved. However, it also found the Coalition extended its commanding two-party-preferred lead over Labor to 57 per cent against 43 per cent in the fortnight when the Prime Minister successfully pushed the mining tax through the Senate. Two weeks earlier, the Coalition led Labor by 53 per cent to 47 per cent. The poll, taken across the nation among 925 respondents, emerged yesterday amid an intense debate about whether Labor's Queensland electoral disaster might be repeated in next year's federal election. With the LNP stripping Labor of 43 seats at the weekend and reducing its parliamentary representation to single figures, former Queensland premier Peter Beattie warned on Sunday that federal Labor must shift course or face annihilation in the northern state in the federal poll. Labor's primary-vote slide represents the first time its vote has fallen below 30 per cent since October after reaching a record low of 26 per cent in mid-September. The government's primary vote has plunged seven percentage points in the past month wiping out most of the gains Ms Gillard secured in the final months of last year and the early months of this year. If the latest Newspoll results were reflected on election day, Labor would be trounced, with its primary vote now 10 percentage points below the support it attracted in the 2010 election, in which it failed to secure a majority of seats in the House of Representatives. Labor's fall came despite Labor celebrations last week over the March 19 passage of the minerals resource rent tax, set to raise $10.6 billion in its first three years. Ms Gillard lauded the vote as evidence of her ability to negotiate difficult legislation through the Senate. When questioned about whether she believed she could win Senate approval for proposed business tax cuts to be funded from the MRRT, she told journalists that they frequently "scoffed" at her ability to steer legislation through passage and was entitled to "go (look at the) scoreboard". The MRRT legislation also included an increase in the superannuation guarantee from 9 per cent to 12 per cent. While the government celebrated this change, it came under heavy attack from business groups, which said employers would have to bear the $20bn-a-year cost, prompting Superannuation Minister Bill Shorten to declare workers would fund most of the increase through deferred pay rises. The latest Newspoll found the Greens primary vote stood at 11 per cent down one point from the March 9-11 survey. Despite Labor's losses, Ms Gillard's personal popularity increased, with voter satisfaction with her performance up three percentage points to 31 per cent as her dissatisfaction rating fell four points to 58 per cent. Thirty-two per cent of voters were satisfied with Tony Abbott's performance, unchanged from a fortnight earlier, and 58 per cent were dissatisfied. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/federal-labor-vote-near-queensland-lows-newspoll/story-fn59niix-1226310792897

Quoting OLD polls wont help you mel, that is a MARCH POLL, the link I provided is a APRIL POLL, I'm sure you know that, but I point that out for everyone else to expose your deceitfulness. ;D ;D ;D

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 12:37pm:

MOTR wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 12:12pm: I've been thinking for quite sometime that Gillard will be replaced but not before the carbon tax is bedded down and [url]not before it's too late to replace Abbott.[/url] A strategy that may help hold some ground but not avert defeat. I think Gillard knows this but has not given up hope of building Labor's support to a level where she can be considered a viable leader. I can't help but think her support of Carr might have been partly motivated by a desire to nobble  Smith. Good luck to her. Please explain the bold part. As to the rest of your post, Gillard is delusional enough to think that she may win the election, and I don't see how bringing in Carr could keep Smith at bay.

While Gillard remains as leader and Abbott continues to successfully prosecute the charge she cannot be trusted, Abbott's liabilities are not such an issue. A clean skin PM (which Rudd could never be) will deny Abbott of his trump card and perhaps focus the electorate on his own integrity and obvious failings. The closer the Labor leadership change is to the election, the more difficult it will be for the Liberals to change leaders. I don't think there is any doubt on either side of politics that a Turnbull led Coalition would romp it in at the next election. That's not to say that won't happen under Abbott, but his unpopularity with the electorate makes him more vulnerable against a Gillardless ALP.

The most likely clean skin is Smith in my mind. Denying him the Foreign Affairs portfolio limits his profile and keeps him in a ministry which is giving him some grief. Just a thought.

Get Rid Of That Disgraceful Lying Woman!
http://endtimesrevelations.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/fear-god-244639.jpg >:(

corporate_whitey wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 1:53pm:

Get Rid Of That Disgraceful Lying Woman! http://endtimesrevelations.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/fear-god-244639.jpg >:(

We know, Whitey. Let Gillard soak up the venom, then switch.

MOTR wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 1:50pm:

matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 12:37pm: MOTR wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 12:12pm: I've been thinking for quite sometime that Gillard will be replaced but not before the carbon tax is bedded down and [url]not before it's too late to replace Abbott.[/url] A strategy that may help hold some ground but not avert defeat. I think Gillard knows this but has not given up hope of building Labor's support to a level where she can be considered a viable leader. I can't help but think her support of Carr might have been partly motivated by a desire to nobble  Smith. Good luck to her. Please explain the bold part. As to the rest of your post, Gillard is delusional enough to think that she may win the election, and I don't see how bringing in Carr could keep Smith at bay. While Gillard remains as leader and Abbott continues to successfully prosecute the charge she cannot be trusted, Abbott's liabilities are not such an issue. A clean skin PM (which Rudd could never be) will deny Abbott of his trump card and perhaps focus the electorate on his own integrity and obvious failings. The closer the Labor leadership change is to the election, the more difficult it will be for the Liberals to change leaders. I don't think there is any doubt on either side of politics that a Turnbull led Coalition would romp it in at the next election. That's not to say that won't happen under Abbott, but his unpopularity with the electorate makes him more vulnerable against a Gillardless ALP. The most likely clean skin is Smith in my mind. Denying him the Foreign Affairs portfolio limits his profile and keeps him in a ministry which is giving him some grief. Just a thought.

Sorry, I put the wrong marker around what I intended to bold.

Yes, I see your point about Smith. However, he is tainted due to that whole Kafer affair. Everyone knows that Gillard reshuffled due to her own self-interests, and not to that of the people.

As to your Tunbull-Abbott remark, Turnbull was not that popular when he was leader. He was only on 17%. I don't think that it will make a scrap of difference who is leader of either party next election, people have just stopped listening to them, and are livid that this undemocratic carbon tax is being foisted upon them. Putting in another leader, and replacing Gillard, may not make the loss so brutal, though. You can be absolutely guaranteed that there will be a new leader by year's end. Most likely, but not definitely, Crean or Shorten. There is no way that Labor would parachute Carr into a seat just so that he could become PM. Certainly not Banks, which Labor hols by a big whopping 1.45%.

Quote:

Certainly not Banks, which Labor hols by a big whopping 1.45%.

OR Blaxland, which they hold by a tiny 30%,hey mel. ;D ;D ;D

Of course Smith was tainted by the Kafer affair. The right wing peanut gallery made certain of that. They know he would be a threat as PM.

Besides the peanut gallery most Australians would agree that Kafer's call to proceed with a disciplinary hearing against the young female cadet on an unrelated and minor alcohol issue at the same time was, "stupid", "inappropriate, insensitive and wrong".

"I don't resile one iota from anything I said or did at the time," and nor should you Mr. Smith.

MOTR wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 2:09pm:

Of course Smith was tainted by the Kafer affair. The right wing peanut gallery made certain of that. They know he would be a threat as PM.

I know that you lefties try to blame everything on the opposition, and Mr Abbott especially, but it's not going to fly. Smith is responsible for his own actions.

MOTR wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 1:59pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 1:53pm: Get Rid Of That Disgraceful Lying Woman! http://endtimesrevelations.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/fear-god-244639.jpg >:( We know, Whitey. Let Gillard soak up the venom, then switch.

The ALP cannot be forgiven for putting people like Gillard & Bob Carr in positions of authority - it is just too much corruption and betrayal of trust. >:(

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 2:13pm:

MOTR wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 2:09pm: Of course Smith was tainted by the Kafer affair. The right wing peanut gallery made certain of that. They know he would be a threat as PM. I know that you lefties try to blame everything on the opposition, and Mr Abbott especially, but it's not going to fly. Smith is responsible for his own actions.

So you are backing Kafer on this one. What part of allowing the character of the potential innocent victim of an alleged serious sexual abuse to be brought into play, doesn't  deserve to be described as "stupid", "inappropriate, insensitive and wrong".

perceptions_now wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 11:08am:

No.

but you are just an idiot as show by your expansive post.

you labor supporters are sometimes stupider that I thought possible. Some of the comments here are beyond stupid. The only chancge labor has to salvage some seats fromt eh electoral train wreeck heading their way is to dump Gillard. They cant win, but they sure can lose by less.

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 3:36pm:

you labor supporters are sometimes stupider that I thought possible. Some of the comments here are beyond stupid. The only chancge labor has to salvage some seats fromt eh electoral train wreeck heading their way is to dump Gillard. They cant win, but they sure can lose by less.

Since Labor are no chance, no need for a protest vote then, hey Longy.  ;)

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 3:36pm:

you labor supporters are sometimes stupider that I thought possible. Some of the comments here are beyond stupid. The only chancge labor has to salvage some seats fromt eh electoral train wreeck heading their way is to dump Gillard. They cant win, but they sure can lose by less.

Coming from someone who believes in fairy tales

longweekend58 wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 3:33pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 11:08am: No. but you are just an idiot as show by your expansive post.

That'd be right, take the man out of context.

MOTR wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 2:36pm:

matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 2:13pm: MOTR wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 2:09pm: Of course Smith was tainted by the Kafer affair. The right wing peanut gallery made certain of that. They know he would be a threat as PM. I know that you lefties try to blame everything on the opposition, and Mr Abbott especially, but it's not going to fly. Smith is responsible for his own actions. So you are backing Kafer on this one. What part of allowing the character of the potential innocent victim of an alleged serious sexual abuse to be brought into play, doesn't  deserve to be described as "stupid", "inappropriate, insensitive and wrong".

Yes, I am backing Kafer. Smith totally took him out of context, and misquoted him.

If the ALP wants Abbott to be PM, they should leave Gillard where she is.

Only a decent leader in the ALP will force the Coalitions position.  With a commanding lead in the polls the Coalition will not want to rock the boat and will slide into an election they dont deserve to win but will do so because the electorate can not stand her.

Verge wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 4:25pm:

If the ALP wants Abbott to be PM, they should leave Gillard where she is. Only a decent leader in the ALP will force the Coalitions position.  With a commanding lead in the polls the Coalition will not want to rock the boat and will slide into an election they dont deserve to win but will do so because the electorate can not stand her.

On what basis?

Yes, Labor totally deserve to win the next election.  ::)

Thing is...who are you going to put in if you deep six JULIAR?

Combet...little man syndrome...

Thought Stephen Smith might be up to it before I got his report card from that retired General ...seems he's a 1st class sh.t to the troops. Not a good look for a Defence Minister.

Swan?...only if you like The Three Stooges.

Rudd....yesterday's man...and yesterday's man wraps tomorrow's fish and chips.

Who else is out there?

Not only is it a Jungle out there, it is a wasteland when it comes to talent in the Labor Party.

red baron wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 4:35pm:

Thing is...who are you going to put in if you deep six JULIAR? Combet...little man syndrome... Thought Stephen Smith might be up to it before I got his report card from that retired General ...seems he's a 1st class sh.t to the troops. Not a good look for a Defence Minister. Swan?...only if you like The Three Stooges. Rudd....yesterday's man...and yesterday's man wraps tomorrow's fish and chips. Who else is out there? Not only is it a Jungle out there, it is a wasteland when it comes to talent in the Labor Party.

Have you looked at the LIBs talent lately? the only person in that party worthy of the PM ship is being hidden.
Abbott would be worse than Gillard, a total tool.
The best person to lead the country is Turnbull, if the Libs dont want him give him to Labor and save us from these imbeciles.

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 4:01pm:

MOTR wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 2:36pm: matty wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 2:13pm: MOTR wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 2:09pm: Of course Smith was tainted by the Kafer affair. The right wing peanut gallery made certain of that. They know he would be a threat as PM. I know that you lefties try to blame everything on the opposition, and Mr Abbott especially, but it's not going to fly. Smith is responsible for his own actions. So you are backing Kafer on this one. What part of allowing the character of the potential innocent victim of an alleged serious sexual abuse to be brought into play, doesn't  deserve to be described as "stupid", "inappropriate, insensitive and wrong". Yes, I am backing Kafer. Smith totally took him out of context, and misquoted him.

How is this about being taken out of context. It is about Kafer allowing a separate disciplinary proceedings involving the female cadet to take place the day after the Skype sex scandal become public. It was an absolutely stupid and insensitive decision. Not some comment that's been taken out of context.

Smith deserves kudos for calling a spade a spade.

red baron wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 4:35pm:

Who else is out there?

What have you got against Malaysian born lesbians?

Uncle Meat wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 5:16pm:

red baron wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 4:35pm: Who else is out there? What have you got against Malaysian born lesbians?

LOL ;D ;D ;D
Imagine the conga line if that happened.

Anyone who can support this morally contemptible dishonest Government is as unworthy a human being as the ALP Minority Government is.  People who should be marked and shunned from good Christian company. ;)

____ wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:12am:

Is there still time to replace Gillard and for Labor to lift their primary higher than the current 20's before the next election. If Labor is so set on giving government away with no fight, should they now limit their loses? Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader?

I hope she stays. Not because I like her, I don't like her one bit. No, I want her to stay so that she will be remembered by all as the Deputy PM who knifed a sitting PM in the back and at the next election took the ALP from being a majority government to a minority government formed on the basis of a lie to the Australian people and then finally she led the ALP to an electoral massacre in 2013 that will make the NSW & QLD elections look tame by comparison.

NOPE

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 7:18pm:

____ wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:12am: Is there still time to replace Gillard and for Labor to lift their primary higher than the current 20's before the next election. If Labor is so set on giving government away with no fight, should they now limit their loses? Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader? I hope she stays. Not because I like her, I don't like her one bit. No, I want her to stay so that she will be remembered by all as the Deputy PM who knifed a sitting PM in the back and at the next election took the ALP from being a majority government to a minority government formed on the basis of a lie to the Australian people and then finally she led the ALP to an electoral massacre in 2013 that will make the NSW & QLD elections look tame by comparison.

I agree AP, except for the last part. NOTHING could make the QLD election look tame.  ;D

matty wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 7:22pm:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 7:18pm: ____ wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:12am: Is there still time to replace Gillard and for Labor to lift their primary higher than the current 20's before the next election. If Labor is so set on giving government away with no fight, should they now limit their loses? Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader? I hope she stays. Not because I like her, I don't like her one bit. No, I want her to stay so that she will be remembered by all as the Deputy PM who knifed a sitting PM in the back and at the next election took the ALP from being a majority government to a minority government formed on the basis of a lie to the Australian people and then finally she led the ALP to an electoral massacre in 2013 that will make the NSW & QLD elections look tame by comparison. I agree AP, except for the last part. NOTHING could make the QLD election look tame.  ;D

They could end up with being the butt of jokes involving seats and a unicycle instead of a Tarago!!!  ;D ;D ;D

62% dissatisfaction

Less people trust Gillard than Abbott.
Newspoll Trustworthiness: Gillard 44 (-17 since 2010 election) Abbott 54 (-4) #auspol

What is Labor waiting for. Gillard has got to go.

____ wrote on Apr 16^th, 2012 at 9:12am:

Is there still time to replace Gillard and for Labor to lift their primary higher than the current 20's before the next election. If Labor is so set on giving government away with no fight, should they now limit their loses? Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader?

Why are you so simple?

What difference will it make if Gillard changes the colour of her hair, wears more lipstick or another Labor imbecile pushes her off her rickety perch?

It is the years of lunatic schemes, billion-dollar waste to activate them, all this hoax-babble about global warming and the imminent carbon tax that is the problem!

Even God would be scratching his head in despair!

Where had the Labor nest found this lot? Scratched them out from under rocks?

olde.sault wrote on Apr 17^th, 2012 at 7:51am:

____ wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:12am: Is there still time to replace Gillard and for Labor to lift their primary higher than the current 20's before the next election. If Labor is so set on giving government away with no fight, should they now limit their loses? Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader? Why are you so simple? What difference will it make if Gillard changes the colour of her hair, wears more lipstick or another Labor imbecile pushes her off her rickety perch? It is the years of lunatic schemes, billion-dollar waste to activate them, all this hoax-babble about global warming and the imminent carbon tax that is the problem! Even God would be scratching his head in despair! Where had the Labor nest found this lot? Scratched them out from under rocks?

What?


Can you repeat, and this time in English?

It's my opinion that Gillard was emplaced to fulfill certain tasks

No-one with an eye on longevity in politics wanted to be seen to be the one to do it.  Hence Rudd (very ambitious) was seen to be 'dumped' by his party -- in order Gillard (who doesn't give a rats about her political future as she'll be well paid later) has fulfilled the role of 'villain'

In the fulness of time, Rudd will emerge again, clothed in the mantle of 'goody boy victim' -- and will grow the agenda implemented by Gillard

For the sake of appearance, there will be the usual Musical Chairs tactic, whereby a pretence of 'change of government' will be effected --  but that's only because we have short attention spans and need novelty-injections, which in turn is why we have a pretence of a two-party system, when in fact anyone with an ounce of intelligence is aware it's all ONE party.  And it's controlled not by the Aussie voter but by overseas interests

So Gillard's not sweating about being dumped.  She expects it.  We all expect it.  It would be justified.  But unfortunately it won't change a thing, just as getting rid of Little Johnny didn't reverse GST

Gillard's done the job she was put in place to do.  No doubt she can't wait to be 'dumped'.  She must be champing at the bit to be free of the whole thing and to get on with the well-funded, privileged rest of her life

PZ547 wrote on Apr 17^th, 2012 at 8:08am:

It's my opinion that Gillard was emplaced to fulfill certain tasks No-one with an eye on longevity in politics wanted to be seen to be the one to do it.  Hence Rudd (very ambitious) was seen to be 'dumped' by his party -- in order Gillard (who doesn't give a rats about her political future as she'll be well paid later) has fulfilled the role of 'villain' In the fulness of time, Rudd will emerge again, clothed in the mantle of 'goody boy victim' -- and will grow the agenda implemented by Gillard For the sake of appearance, there will be the usual Musical Chairs tactic, whereby a pretence of 'change of government' will be effected --  but that's only because we have short attention spans and need novelty-injections, which in turn is why we have a pretence of a two-party system, when in fact anyone with an ounce of intelligence is aware it's all ONE party.  And it's controlled not by the Aussie voter but by overseas interests So Gillard's not sweating about being dumped.  She expects it.  We all expect it.  It would be justified.  But unfortunately it won't change a thing, just as getting rid of Little Johnny didn't reverse GST Gillard's done the job she was put in place to do.  No doubt she can't wait to be 'dumped'.  She must be champing at the bit to be free of the whole thing and to get on with the well-funded, privileged rest of her life

Rudd has been burned. If there was a desire to bring Rudd back they wouldn't have so thoroughly destroyed his reputation.

A change is likely, but it will never be Rudd.

____ wrote on Apr 17^th, 2012 at 7:55am:

olde.sault wrote on Apr 17th, 2012 at 7:51am: ____ wrote on Apr 16th, 2012 at 9:12am: Is there still time to replace Gillard and for Labor to lift their primary higher than the current 20's before the next election. If Labor is so set on giving government away with no fight, should they now limit their loses? Should Gillard be dumped A.S.A.P for a more popular leader? Why are you so simple? What difference will it make if Gillard changes the colour of her hair, wears more lipstick or another Labor imbecile pushes her off her rickety perch? It is the years of lunatic schemes, billion-dollar waste to activate them, all this hoax-babble about global warming and the imminent carbon tax that is the problem! Even God would be scratching his head in despair! Where had the Labor nest found this lot? Scratched them out from under rocks? What? Can you repeat, and this time in English?

What about criticising yourself, like, what do you mean by your initial announcement:

"Less people trust Gillard than Abbott" ???

I was momentary confused but I persevered. . .

It should have read:" "Less people trust Gillard than they trust Abbott".

Anyway, stop being coy - you understood exactly what I meant.

Seems, Labor politicians are made up mainly of union heavies, individuals who hadn't studied nor worked hard, just bulldozed themselves into powerful positions and now, either through stupidity or venomous intent, have destroyed the economy.

Wake up, Greenhorn!

If labor wants to lose the next election with honour rather than be crushed, it will replace Gillard now.