July 18, 2010 at 6:01 am #252710
With the election called the countdown to polling day will be dominated by pollie chat & back chat. Sustainability (Economic, Social & Environmental) will be the biggest theme but the mix will be interesting.
I have started this thread to see what other alsers think. I am interested in your thoughts on who you may vote for & why and how this changes daily as the campaign heats up.
Here are a few initial thoughts of mine.
The coalition under Howard produced good economic sustainability but its social & environmental sustainability was lacking.
Rudd did a great job in preventing a needless recession and history I think will judge him favourably on this.
Gillard now has the reigns, and whilst a fundamentally good person is untested as a leader, beholden to ALP / Union factions and bruised by her early performance & role in Rudds govn.
Abbot to is fundamentally a good person with strong family ties. He has good ministerial experience but is dominated (tainted?) by Howard’s Workchoices.
The Greens under Bob Brown have the best environmental & social policies but may lack economic credibility & experience and have no chance in forming Government.
My House of Representative vote will go to the party who can provide the best mix for a Sustainable Australia short & long term. The Senate should be a true house of review and is therefore best suited to no party having outright majority. Some say this prevents good Government but it â€œKeeps the Buggers Honestâ€ and accountable.
😀July 18, 2010 at 6:21 am #471648AlpineMember
lets not pretend theres 3 partys theres the lib/nats and lab/greens..thats the choices and labor have been shocking esp this last year and changing to some one else will not make a scrap of differance as she was in on all the idiotic policys and promoted them
I have voted labor all my life but will not this time as julias morals on her part in rudds demise are questionable and her back pedaling on all of her policys show lack of backbone and her boat people policy of sending them to east timor shows a lack of brains when u announce it but forget to ask east timor their thoughts on the idea and they vote against itJuly 18, 2010 at 7:04 am #471649
I dont quite agree that there is a Lab / Green link. If Rudd had negotiated with the Greens over the CPRS he would most likely still be PM. Instead he tried to do a deal with the coalition & big business and the rest is history.
Certainly Gillard was part of the gang of four but she is no Kevin07. The coalition will try and exploit her part in the Rudd government so that will be interesting to watch.
We dont know the full story of the Rudd-Gillard leadership discussion so its hard to comment on that exactly.
Her East Timor strategy was a debacle and may of been new PM nerves. However there are no L plates in Government leadership.
The one thing I really hope is who ever is PM sticks up to what they promise. Rudd promised so much but delivered so little. Sure the GFC buggered things up but his capitulation and ineptitude on so many really important matters was pathetic.July 18, 2010 at 7:44 am #471650AlpineMember
who do the greens give their preferences too?
not to the libs thats for sureJuly 18, 2010 at 7:56 am #471651
I am sure the majority of green voters give there preferences to the ALP. However, as a union founded and run party a huge amount of the ordinary ALP voting union workers find the Greens a pain in the ring ding. Forestry workers hate the greens and you can hardly say that those union workers in the mining & building industries are pro Bob Brown and his policies. To further this John Howard successfully courted the ardent ALP voting forestry union workers in Tasmania to help him beat a Mark Latham lead Labour party. Sure the Greens & green voters give there preferences to Labour most of the time but not always and its not reciprocated as a rule.July 18, 2010 at 8:00 am #471652IdunaMember
Alpine I am happy to read your views on the different parties but please keep the “ranga” comments to yourself.July 18, 2010 at 8:24 am #471653
This Keatingesque getting off the subject is rather amusing. I dont find ranga derogatory in the slightest and put simply Orangutans are far wiser than humans anyway.
I have just seen the first ad (propaganda?) from the Liberals. Sincere, Convincing-probably yes, genuine?July 18, 2010 at 8:24 am #471654AnjaMember
Still no need to be deliberately offensive…July 18, 2010 at 8:48 am #471655df418Member
don’t vote for any of them. it just encourages their belief that they are actually doing something.
Show me a pollie who isn’t in it for the $$$$$, but rather to make a difference and I’ll vote for themJuly 18, 2010 at 9:21 am #471656SteveMember
That’s a rather short sighted view, df418.July 18, 2010 at 9:29 am #471657
Some pollies may be in it for the money but a substantial amount are not soley motivated by the $$. Polies motives are quite varied but any politician in a non back bench role can earn far more in private enterprise. In addition many back benchers could also earn a lot more outside Canberra.July 18, 2010 at 9:35 am #471658df418Member
Steve & Porgey, it might be short sighted, but your failure to rise to the challenge validates my assertion. 🙂July 18, 2010 at 9:45 am #471659from the ashesMember
I doubt very much if Malcolm Turnbull was in the political circus for money and we all saw what happened to him
And i don’t believe some people who are in it for the dollars necessarily do a bad job or sell their soulJuly 18, 2010 at 9:47 am #471660SteveMember
df418, I have respect for a number of pollies – from local government through to federal. Not all of course, but many.
And as Porgey says, if they are in it for the money, they wouldn’t be pollies.July 18, 2010 at 10:08 am #471661
Many things motivate people to find employment. Money, status, contribution, self worth, necessity etc. are some of those motivating factors. Anyone who enters politics has to go through quite a timely performance to reach parliament and genuinely wants to do there share of good.
What really gets up my goat though are those pollies who stand up and promise things that they dont keep. Values, honesty, hard work, a fair go, and sticking to your word are key stones of a good person in my, and hope your, opinion. I think Kevin Rudd is a good person but he completely stuffed up by discarding so many of his ’07 promises. Howard had his non core core promises which was a disgrace, Keating had his “recession we had to have” crap which was the biggest breaking of political prowess that I have ever heard. Worse than Hawkes “no child will live in poverty…” promise and Frasers promise & mandate to stand up for his pre ’75 positions.
People, especially politicians, need to stick to there promises – its fundamental. Turnbull came a cropper as Lib leader but at least he stuck to what he believed in. He may yet become a good PM as he is not soley motivated by $$. I hope Gillard or Abbott can show a bit of ticker in this department.
Let truth & competence be the judge not spin & U turns.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.