PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

500N 21st Mar 2013 22:54

The reaction ?

A collective groan !
She is an ambitious person who does it for herself,
not the country.

All the media outlets came down to near my place
and outside her electoral office, asked people walking
along. Most preferred Rudd.

The problem we have is Gillard gets in as we are a very safe
Labor seat so people vote for Labor even if they don't like Gillard.

CoodaShooda 21st Mar 2013 22:58

Worrals

What does it tell you, when the whips loyalty must be to the leader, that not only the Chief Whip but two of his supporting whips have seen fit to resign?

Worrals in the wilds 21st Mar 2013 23:17

I'm just not sure whether these guys are brilliant political strategists or complete geese...:hmm:
I guess time will tell. I'd like to think Crean and Co have something up their sleeves. Either way, the non-spill shows that 1. Gillard won't quit and 2. She thinks she's doing a great job. It's also showed that she still retains a degree of support within the Caucus. A lot of leftie Laborites don't like Crean or Rudd, so she may even get a small rise in support from the dwindling faithful. Not enough to win, of course, and if it happens I think it will be very temporary.. :ouch:

Wishing for resignations/early elections etc is therefore probably futile.

Buster Hyman 21st Mar 2013 23:17

Interesting to note that whilst Eddie & his select team of ALP sympathisers on Triple M were talking to Richo & then Crean, they couldn't help but put in audio of Abbott being howled down during some speech. Can't let the biggest story of the day go against their preferred team can they? :rolleyes:

Andu 22nd Mar 2013 00:08


Out of interest, what was the general reaction when Gillard claimed yesterday that she did not seek high office for herself but was doing it because Australia needed her (or words to that effect)?
I heard a woman caller pushing exactly that line on ALPBC 702 Sydney yesterday, which makes me wonder if McTernan's team hasn't decided that this should be the catch phrase of the day (like the "Moving Forward" etc.). They're all trying to re-write history, and surely even Gillard can see that if she isn't to look like the biggest failure since Whitlam, even surpassing Whitlam, she really needs to start creating some major re-adjustment of what really happened for the history books.

Labor have succeeded in doing this before. Ask any Gen Y or Xer who's gone through the thoroughly politicized Australian "educhayshion" system and 99% of them will tell you that Whitlam brought the troops home from Vietnam. The fact that they were all home 10 months before Whitlam was elected is totally ignored.

I find the long game play theory by Crean easy to believe. Despite what's being said by the survivors today, many if not most, particularly those at risk of losing their seats, recognise and privately acknowledge that they'd be in a far stronger position with any leader but Gillard. All the Libs have to do is repeatedly replay "There will be no carbon tax in a government I lead" and any other promise Gillard makes in the election campaign will turn to dust.

Gillard this morning only doing FM radio interviews, where she knows there'll be no hard questions. Shades of Rooty Hill... (The ALPBC said that she'd refused the invitation to be interviewed by them this morning.)


...and oh, how I hope Abbott calls a double dissolution and that damned Christine Milne disappears from public life.

CoodaShooda 22nd Mar 2013 00:23

I feel yesterday's storm in a tea cup was a reflection of the lack of support for Rudd within caucus rather than a display of support for Gillard.

"Tough and feisty" or "arrogant and pig headed"?

Traffic_Is_Er_Was 22nd Mar 2013 00:42

My 2c worth: It all seemed too pat and far too public.
Crean is a Juliar supporter so has fallen on his sword to get rid of the Krudd distraction. He knows he is out of a job in 6 months anyway so take one for the team and go for the leadership after the election. Krudd has painted himself into a corner as he can't challenge now because he has promised he won't unless some very precise conditions are met, and they won't be. Crean's job now is to paint his former "white knight" Krudd in as bad a light as possible, as evidenced by the " he said he texted me before hand but he didn't so don't believe a word the evil mans says he's a liar liar liar" sound bite that is getting aired ad nauseum today. Mark my words, Crean will very publicly knife Krudd every chance he gets now. Also, he has also forced some other high profile Kruddites to also walk the plank, thus removing their de-stabilising influence.
This is a Labour goverment that knows it's f*cked. They will all start trying to distance themselves from the on rushing train wreck so they can put their hand on their hearts and swear to their electorates that it wasn't their fault and that they did the "honourable" thing and stepped down/away.

500N 22nd Mar 2013 00:43

The problem now is, a fair bit of good talent has been sacked
or resigned and so the "team" she is taking to the election is
now much weaker than before and a hell of a lot less
experienced.

What a bloody mess.

She needs to go to the election now or soon.

sisemen 22nd Mar 2013 01:49

Yup, I reckon that this was a confected crisis designed to put down Krudd once and for all. You only have to listen to the precise language used by the players - Crean in particular when he stressed, on more than one occasion, that it was "not personal" and that it "needs to bring matters to a head". The whole tone was not particularly critical of Dullard either.

It seems that the power brokers have outwitted Krudd yet again and may well have spiked his guns for all time.

However, I said earlier, it ain't gonna stop the plotting and dysfunction. One only hopes that it gets too bad (as reflected in the opinion polls) that they are forced to go before 14 Sep.

RJM 22nd Mar 2013 03:23

If this was a put-up job, its author was probably Gillard. As with a crooked business operator, it makes you think, 'If they're so smart, why not do it the honest, straightforward way?'

This is from Pickering:


False polling results handed to Caucus members by the Gillard camp in 2010, was first reported by Pickering Post mid last year.

A last minute internal poll showing a Rudd recovery was deliberately kept from Caucus.

Even more treacherous was a separate poll where known Rudd sympathisers were actually excluded from the survey.

These deliberately distorted results shown to Party swingers were sufficient to shift Caucus to Gillard.

This treasonous act was carried out in Rudd's absence and without his knowledge. It was skewed to deliberately mislead Caucus prior to the leadership vote... it worked.

The Tele's lead story today may be old news but it confirms the treacherous depths to which Gillard will sink to get her way, while denying all knowledge of any challenge.

The political infidelity of Gillard is a dark perfidious background to today's Leadership struggle.

What is likely to happen?

The political pundits don't know, Gillard and Rudd don't know. Caucus hasn't a clue and the Libs are enjoying a front row seat.

In over half a century I have never seen such a political mess and it's all of Gillard's making.

I'll stay with my humble assessment last week that the media Bill has no legs and the Leadership struggle has to be resolved by today, Thursday, if at all and I'm starting to lean toward the "if at all" option.

This is really extraordinary.

Commentators are tallying Rudd's increasing vote but is it really Rudd's increasing vote or Gillard's diminishing vote?

Those who now want Gillard gone are not necessarily those who want Rudd back.

If a handful of those anti Gillard votes belong to Shorten or Crean, the accident prone Gillard wins again.

Anti Gillard doesn't necessarily equate to pro Rudd yet every forecaster has decided it's a Rudd-only v Gillard contest.

Gillard and her supporters' horrific debasement of Rudd during his last challenge has left the two camps irreconcilably hostile.

The damage wrought on the Party was a cost Gillard was prepared to pay for the Leadership prize but a generation of bad blood will haunt the ALP.

Gillard is fortunate, she is openly canvassing and coddling numbers. Rudd cannot be seen to be doing that... he has made a commitment not to challenge and that is a severe disadvantage.

Labor knows it can't win with Gillard. She is relentlessly hauling them to political oblivion, but they still can't stomach Rudd.

The choice between the two is agonising and waters are further muddied by Independents threatening an election if she is dumped.

Gillard has worked herself into a unique position where it would be suicidal to dump her and suicidal to keep her.

The fence sitters have decided barbed wire is less painful than either of two evil choices.

A glance at a bookmaker's board shows Rudd at $1.50 and Gillard at $2.50, all the way down to the odious Garrett at $250.00. Looks like some punters are having a fight with their wallets.

If Rudd is the bookies' favourite to be the next Labor Leader then Kim Jong-un should be favourite for the next Nobel Peace Prize.

Polls do show Rudd is twice as popular as Gillard. But that's an indictment on Gillard and in no way a cigar for Rudd!

Ivan Milat would outpoll Gillard.

Rudd would rip the Party further apart wreaking vengeance on old foes. He is that sort of bloke, he knows where they live and anyway a bloke with a woman's hands can never be trusted.

The Gillard catastrophe is memory fresh, the Rudd catastrophe less so.

So, how strange that the worst two options imaginable are the only two available?

Worrals in the wilds 22nd Mar 2013 03:29

Treasonous? Pickering does get excited, doesn't he...:hmm::}

Anti Gillard doesn't necessarily equate to pro Rudd yet every forecaster has decided it's a Rudd-only v Gillard contest.
I think that's a fair point that's being ignored by the print media.

Clare Prop 22nd Mar 2013 03:51

Simon Crean yesterday showed himself to be far too honest and sensible to be part of her cabinet, so off he had to go leaving no grown-ups in the cabinet at all.

Also looked to me how nice it would be listening to someone like Crean on the telly leading the ALP/ Question Time rather than the "tough and fiesty" female whose personality is more suited to a picket line or student socialist march. My hatred for her and all she stands for went up a few gears watching QT this week.

I know lots of people who are "tough" but it doesn't mean they'd be good at leading the country.

The fact that the party even CONSIDERED those media laws and the Roxon filthy legislation shows that this "progressive" party actually want to take us back to the USSR of the 1960s. Scary that so many Laborites actually WANT that and so many of thier followers who don't know what it's like to live in the shadow of communism seem to think that it is OK because you have to "Silence Wicked Rupert Murdoch". And those Labor MPs who didn't agree with it, because they are Labor, have to do as they are told, so they are just as bad. That is what I HATE about Labor, party first, constituents last, yet some voters are deluded into thinking thier local MP represents them rather than dogma and factions, even if he/she did give a toss.

And it was interesting that the motion to have a vote of no confidence DID get a majority of votes, just not the majority of 76 that was needed. Only a couple of votes short...

I remember so clearly when Thatcher did that to Callaghan and how we finally got the UK out of the "Winter of discontent" abyss and literally changed the world. It was an exciting political time, it got over the line by one vote but in those days there weren't just two political parties but realistic alternatives and ...sadly here we don't have that.

Just listening to Martin Ferguson...he was going well until he tried to take credit for "creating jobs in the minig industry" :ugh::ugh::ugh:

CoodaShooda 22nd Mar 2013 04:03

Interesting that Ferguson intends to sit on the backbench, contest the election and serve another full term if elected.

Looks like there will be a move to ditch Gillard before the election and a clearing out of her 'elite' to allow a return to Hawke/Keating.

Ferguson particularly critical of the class war and the directions taken since 2007.

7x7 22nd Mar 2013 04:15

I agree with you, Cooda. When you remove the PC Pardee filter that he's carefully maintaining, Ferguson is utterly dumping on Gillard with his repeated class warfare comments.

I don't think we've seen the last leadership spill within Labar before the election. Crean the compromise candidate looks the most likely bet - and I think quite a few of the more astute senior Labor men can see that already. This explains why they're appearing to fall on their swords - they're clearing themselves of the taint of Gillard so that they'll be more suitable candidates for a front bench position in a Crean government.

CoodaShooda 22nd Mar 2013 04:44

Kim Carr has gone too.

Are we getting to the point of laborites to the centre and neo-Stalinists to the left? :E

Clare Prop 22nd Mar 2013 04:53

The Fed's blanket ban on Fenthium is causing all kinds of problems for fruit growers in WA. No consultation, no alternative, growers going out of business after decades, as predicted by my local bloke Don last year Canning Electorate: Mediterranean...: 12 Sep 2012: House debates (OpenAustralia.org)

hellsbrink 22nd Mar 2013 05:04

I reckon that Gillard's "snap" leadership vote without competition was nothing of the sort, it was just yet another ploy to make sure she massages her ego whilst everything falls down around her. Let's face it, nobody gets such a vote called unless there is actually a "stalking horse" in the background, there is a real "challenger", and in this case even a blind dog could see there was nothing in the background.

So, in true Socialist style, the ballot goes out with one name on the paper and no "none of the above" option. The vote can only go one way, she gets to tell the world that she is still in charge and that 100% of the votes went in her favour.

The difference is that this time even the most stupid member of the public can see through what happened, how it was all just another scam, how it was meaningless and how it was up there with Saddam Hussein saying everyone loved him because they voted for him.

A diversion, same as the "apology" over the "Take the kids from single mothers" scandal that she has had over a year to contemplate (report released 29/02/12) but never even thought about until she realised that there was more crap on the fan than it could throw off.

And she thinks that will make people vote for her again?

david1300 22nd Mar 2013 05:08

Interesting results so far on the daily NineMSN poll:
http://i50.tinypic.com/2ij0qoy.jpg

I read some excellent commentary in todays Financial Review - a good mix of Labor and Coalition views.

But the saddest part of it was that approx 8 full pages were devoted to the ALP leadership woes, and less than a quarter page to the Media Bills that were so precious (and alledgedly good policy - not) a week ago. I think this reflects what is going on right now - the Labor Party is 95% about itself, it's leaders and it's survival, and less than 5% about good policy and governing the country.

david1300 22nd Mar 2013 05:17

Interesting comparison there, Hells. My wife is not a political person at all, yet today she made the comparison between JG and other despots of the world (naming Hussain, Idi Amin, Castro and others) in what she saw as a similar inner need in them - hang onto personal power at all costs, and no matter what the cost to the country or it's citizens. (She excluded other aspects of their actions, but noted this strong similarity). I wonder how many other people, women in particular, see this?

She also made another point - the strongest 'defence' JG's Labors parliamentary team make of JG is that she is 'tough'. There is no mention of other qualities that we would probably like to see in out national leader, things like Compassion, Understanding, Statesman (a gender-neutral term), Visionary, Honest, a person of Integrity, Trustworthy, etc.

This intro from Maxine McKews' article in the Fin Mail (remember her - the one-termer who ousted John Howard):

Maxine McKew No one is buying the Labor Party line

PUBLISHED: 15 hours 19 MINUTES AGO | UPDATE: 4 hours 21 MINUTES AGO PUBLISHED: 22 Mar 2013 PRINT EDITION: 22 Mar 2013


There is only one thing that any of us can say with any confidence after the depressing shambles of yesterday’s Labor leadership ballot. It’s pretty simple really. Australian voters are impatient to have their say and to decide for themselves who gets to be Australia’s next prime minister.

Mach Turtle 22nd Mar 2013 05:45

What happened to the guy who wrestled the croc?


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:42.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.