The truth is that, while people generally think Abbott (at best) lacks substance or (at worst) is a bit of a nutter, the Labor government has been looking like a bunch of amateurs for the last three years. It’s making voters all nostalgic over the Howard years, when our government was relatively stable and projected an image of borderline competence, even when it was lying about children being thrown overboard or cozying up to Bush Jr. Abbott symbolises a return to Howard-style conservatism.
Two senior members of the Labor Party have tendered their resignations: Nicola Roxon (Attorney General) and Chris Evans, (leader of the Senate and the Minister for Higher Education).
Not boding well, but with an election campaign this long, the punters will have forgotten about this little schemozzle by the time the ballots open on 14th September. Unless more rodents start jumping off the cursed ship of course.
Urgghh. I’m a born and bred Labor supporter…it’s in my genes. But I have to say that the party have screwed up big-time this time. Only a miracle will see the Labor Party take government again. 
Oh, and despite policy promises, I will bet a gazillion dollars that Abbott does NOT revoke the carbon tax. You saw it here first folks!! 
Another prediction is that Abbott will be dumped at the first opportunity (maybe even before the election)…Joe Hockey seems to have more street cred and he would be my first pick for future leader of the Libs. Also, Rudd will initiate a spill for leadership, but maybe not until much of the next term is completed.
I’m psychic yannow? 
Don’t know about it being Hockey; a surprising number of the younger folks at work, who I assume are Labor voters, seem to like Turnbull while hating Abbott. The common theme seems to be that, of all the “leaders” of the parties, at least he seems intelligent and not an embarrassment. I tell them, of course, that he too is a politician.
The comments I’m hearing from people seem to be that they don’t like Julia Gillard - but they also dislike Tony Abbott for various reasons, so there appears to be a sort of “Voting for Kang or Kodos” feeling there.
I’ve said it before, I’ve said it again: Australian politics needs a viable third party (ie one that’s not made up of greenies or people with concerning fringe views).
So what sort of platform would this third party have IYHO? Would it be an ultra-conservative, or a radical leftie group?
Can’t be middle-of-the-road 'cos we already have two of them.
I personally wouldn’t mind a kind of soft libertarian party that still heavily funds health and education but ditches the social conservatism that both major parties carry and slashes things like the baby bonus.
Droll but true.
That’s part of the problem, though - both major parties are pretty much of a muchness IMHO.
Lobot’s hypothetical party sounds like the sort of thing I’d like to see - a sort of “Night Watchman” government of sorts; one that basically stays out of everyone’s way but makes sure the power/roads/hospitals/schools/emergency services etc are fully funded.
Yep both parties have drifted towards a centre position and to be honest it makes sense, this is where people will move between parties on single issues. I would like to see the Labor party take on some issues such as gay marriage etc etc but they are too bloody scared of losing the next election. This is the fundamental problem with a two party system, they will be come more and more like each other over time. Even the good old Nationals who were always good for a laugh are now just Liberals with Akubra hats.
So in short I have been a good old labor voter, I remember the first time I voted there was the issue of the Gordon below Franklin Dam and this single issue made me choose Labor over Liberal. Don’t know which way I will vote now, they are all the same shade of beige.
???
Does this have to do with alcohol, or perhaps bodily fluids?
I had held out for Malcolm Turnbull to knife Tony until he was bloody, pitch Christopher Pyne and Joe Hockey off into the hinterlands of the back bench and restore some sort of sanity, but alas, no.
So I will vote Green as usual, knowing my prefs will flow to Labor in my safe, inner-western Sydney seat.
But I want Malcolm to be PM, I surely, sorely do.
Quiet, you! I’m suffering withdrawal and I need this electoral fix!
I know an Australian Friedmanite gay rights campaigner that uses “wet” as a synonym for “left” and “dry” as a synonym for “right”. So he has “dry” economics and “wet” social views, as far as I can tell.
This from a place where political faction monikers include Tea Party and Bull Moose? 
Mind you, within the continually evolving Byzanthine labrinth of the Australian Labor Party’s factionals the NSW Labor Right have two factions; Terrigals and Ferals.
As a broad definition within the Australian context:
LIBs who have conservative views on both economics and social policy are Dry
LIBs who have conservative on economics but liberal on social policy are Wet
If you are liberal on economic policy you should be a LAB.
And Turnbull is the ultimate wet: to the extent that a surprising number of my generally-Labor voting friends would consider voting for him if he were the Liberal candidate. That’s why you have the rather weird (but understandable) experience of reading posts like Gleena’s above where she says she’s a Green voter but would vote for Turnbull if she could.
Yeah, there’s a lot of “I’d never vote Liberal… unless Turnbull was leader.” I’ve heard that quite a bit.
Trouble is, there’s really no incentive for the Libs to ditch Abbott for Turnbull–it’d lead to a decisive victory, but I imagine Turnbull is quite divisive within the party. It would be like the mirror-universe version of Kevin '07.
Yeah, exactly that. I tend to run a bit fiscally conservative (for Australian values of - remember I’m also American and vote in those elections, too, where I run left as hell from an American persepctive).
But I’m socially very very liberal, and Turnbull ticks all my boxes.
Plus, I’m sorry, I’m a law student fan girl. I had to read a case from years ago when he was a barrister. I just couldn’t understand the case, it was late (like 2am), I was trying to write a paper and running on Red Bull and coffee, so my overwrought brain said, “Well, just e-mail Malcom Turnbull and ask him then, he was the barrister for the plaintiff!”
So I did.
And he answered me. At lenghth, in great detail. Said he didn’t remember the case but he’d gone to the trouble to look up the judgement and refresh himself and then he explained it to me. And even though it was e-mail I’m almost positive it was him, too, or he has an aide that types mostly in lower case. And he was really gracious and nice and wished me luck in my studies and everything. And he was opposition leader at the time, it’s not like he had nothing else to do!
That e-mail garantees I’d vote for Malcolm Turnbull if I have the chance for the rest of my life.
Would bet dollars to donuts that it was Malcom.
I’m not even a Law student but I’d also vote for him on that basis. Good on him!
Actually, I’d probably also be counted among the myriad I’d-vote-Lib-if-Turnbull-were-leader. I cannot imagine myself voting for a party of which Tony Abbott is leader. Not if I live for a thousand years.
Yeah, penultima thule and jabiru, I was pretty blown away that he took the time. Wish he’d managed to muzzle Pyne, Abbot and the Nats when he was in charge, although the fact he went down on an issue because he refused to compromise his values makes me happy.
I vote Green, I should clarify for Princhester because Labor is a shit-show of corruption, although I suppose I’m closer to a Labor voter than a Green voter in actual values. I vote Green in a bit of defiance, knowing it doesn’t actually matter because my preferences will flow. I’m in Carmel Tebbutt’s seat, it’s not like she’s going anywhere.
I really wanted to love Julia, but I can’t. When she failed on the gay marriage issue and she mishandled the Craig Thomson affair, I went off her. Although her misogyny speech was fantastic. Till you remember she was deflecting attention from the Peter Slipper scandal. But still, watching The Mad Monk squirm on the front bench for once made me a happy little new Australian, it sure did.
(In other news, now that the election is announced I know for a fact my son will get to vote for the very first time. I’m kind of proud, weirdly. He turns 18 just about 30 days prior!)
Rudd seems to be undermining the Gillard government’s chances of re-election at every opportunity. Besides generally putting his face on camera whenever he can, he most recently put the boot in on the matter of the investigation into the leaked “Happy Little Vegemite” video and then on Swan’s bungled mining tax. (Swan really is a disaster when it comes to selling a credible image, no matter what you think of the government’s policies, so when Rudd points the finger at Swan, there’s no risk in looking like he’s merely shifting blame.)
So Turnbull has voiced the opinion that the ALP will go to the polls with Rudd as leader. No doubt a change in ALP leadership may cause the Libs to reconsider Turnbull as their leader as well. Of course, Rudd is ostensibly dismissing the idea out-of-hand.
So is any of this likely? Or is it all just idle political speculation?