Australian Politics (1 Viewer)

[Trefoil]

...But the Greens aren't radical leftists?

Of course they're not.

 

[Lentern]

Because he plays populist politics?

I agree with Hawke, he needs a speech writer.

They all played populist politics, Rudd is just better at it. Are you telling me J Howard changed his position on the GST because his liking for the actual policy changed? At any rate wouldn't placing more emphasis on how well his speeches were phrased give him even less substance?

Keating went around offending people, true but he probably viewed it as a kind of charming arrogance and just missread the electorate.

 

[spiny norman]

Of course they're not.

I was trying to say that the Liberals are fascist. I think my joke failed.

 

[blue_chameleon]

They all played populist politics, Rudd is just better at it. Are you telling me J Howard changed his position on the GST because his liking for the actual policy changed? At any rate wouldn't placing more emphasis on how well his speeches were phrased give him even less substance?

Keating went around offending people, true but he probably viewed it as a kind of charming arrogance and just missread the electorate.

Kevin, Kevin Rudd.

International man of mystery.

To me, he doesn't seem to be able to shake his diplomatic roots. Was a good diplomat, but necessarily doesn't make a good Prime Minister. All credit to the guy in writing his own speeches, but his speeches are 90 % of the time so full of jargonistic crap, that nobody can actually understand the point he is trying to present.

Prime Minister's need to connect with the whole country, and he struggles to acheive that with his speech writing atm. He's a better diplomat than Prime Minister imho.

 

[Iron]

But he leaked a Bushism
And snubs Turnbull, socially!

 

[blue_chameleon]

But he leaked a Bushism
And snubs Turnbull, socially!

Yes. Maybe not so diplomatic, anymoar.

 

[Iron]

I'm unimpressed with how Rudd has treated the office of PM. Lots of populist things he has done have diminished the dignity of the institution imo (Rove, myspace etc) - he's willing to sacrifice much for his own vanity.
He's part policy-wonk, part school-boy, part media-darling, part loner. He is odd. Without doubt, Turnbull is my preferred PM atm, but i'm no great fan of the liberal team or platform

 

[Trefoil]

Prime Minister's need to connect with the whole country, and he struggles to acheive that with his speech writing atm. He's a better diplomat than Prime Minister imho.

That's an interesting claim to make considering he has one of the highest (highest?) approval ratings of all our leaders throughout history at between 60% and 70% favourable.

I think you give too much credit to the importance of speeches.

I was trying to say that the Liberals are fascist. I think my joke failed.

I honestly spent a good minute trying to figure out what your joke was but it evaded me.

 

[Lentern]

Kevin, Kevin Rudd.

International man of mystery.

To me, he doesn't seem to be able to shake his diplomatic roots. Was a good diplomat, but necessarily doesn't make a good Prime Minister. All credit to the guy in writing his own speeches, but his speeches are 90 % of the time so full of jargonistic crap, that nobody can actually understand the point he is trying to present.

Prime Minister's need to connect with the whole country, and he struggles to acheive that with his speech writing atm. He's a better diplomat than Prime Minister imho.

I'm not assessing him as a prime minister I'm assessing him as a politician. As a prime minister I have a strong disliking of him, as a politician I think he and Lindsay Tanner make the rest of the labor party look pathetic and that Turnbull and Costello are the only ones capable of salvaging any dignity in 2010.

I can't give you with any confidence the reasons but his style is well recieved. Far more so than that of Howard who lost the popular vote in his first re-election attempt and was saved by the Tampa in 2001. His sing song verbosity and cultivated accent are well liked for god knows what reason whilst the grand orators never really got far. Whitlam was an orator I'll admit, but after so many years of liberal rule I'm inclined to think 72 was a very hard election for him to lose(mind you Calwell probably could have pulled it off.)

The analogy I heard was that if you were holding a silent election, would you get a poet or a journalist to write your arguements?

 

[Iron]

Yeah his popularity was derived from him not physically being Howard. It has been sustained first because of Nelson's failure and now because of the financial crisis.

 

[Lentern]

Yeah his popularity was derived from him not physically being Howard. It has been sustained first because of Nelson's failure and now because of the financial crisis.

Please tell me you don't buy into all that post hoc. Just tell me if I have the following right, Rudd is the most popular major party leader because he took on a man who was more popular than Keating or Fraser before they're demise. He sustained this sucess because of Nelsons unpoularity, which was only slightly less than Beazley's yet Rudd's is incredibly higher, and because the economy is going down the tube. Cuckoo!

 

[Iron]

Look, it's a long honeymoon - sure. But the Howard years were much longer and can seem like a desert in terms of humanity, relatability etc. It's a generational change and, after 12years of 'steady as she goes', people are generally enthusiastic about the choppier waters.

 

[Trefoil]

I should think most leaders are elected in response to the incumbent (whether to shitcan him, or through boredom/stagnation).

It's not exactly a bad thing or evidence they're not politically savvy. Their actual term is a better judge of that.

 

[badquinton304]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2008/11/20/2425546.htm

 

[Trefoil]

There's some fascinating trends in the NSW state election opinion polls: http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/...caller=latest&state=Any&mode=file&page=Search

Go there and click on the bimonthly NSW poll link.

Basically, compared to one and a half years ago: Labour has lost 25% of its vote. Greens have gained 25% more votes. Liberals have gained 50% more votes. Nationals have lost 50% of their votes.

Liberals are now firmly ahead in the two-party prefered vote. On the other hand, Nathan Rees's unfavourable rating is 25% compared to Iemma's 60%, so things could easily get better for Labour from here. Although I'm not exactly sure it's appropriate for Labour to be in charge of NSW for another term. A shakeup is always healthy for preventing stagnation.

 

[chicky_pie]

There's some fascinating trends in the NSW state election opinion polls: http://www.newspoll.com.au/cgi-bin/...caller=latest&state=Any&mode=file&page=Search

Go there and click on the bimonthly NSW poll link.

Basically, compared to one and a half years ago: Labour has lost 25% of its vote. Greens have gained 25% more votes. Liberals have gained 50% more votes. Nationals have lost 50% of their votes.

Liberals are now firmly ahead in the two-party prefered vote. On the other hand, Nathan Rees's unfavourable rating is 25% compared to Iemma's 60%, so things could easily get better for Labour from here. Although I'm not exactly sure it's appropriate for Labour to be in charge of NSW for another term. A shakeup is always healthy for preventing stagnation.

A easy ride for Barry O'Farrell

 

[spiny norman]

I don't know about that. Rees is leading O'Farrell as Preferred Premier by a small but decent margin. He's clearly made something of a good impression to people who hate Iemma.

O'Farrell's coasting now and is much too confident it's a foregone conclusion. There's still two and a half years to go, and I honestly think the state government's just tempered the worst of it - I doubt this kind of scrutiny and anger can be maintained for all that time.

 

[Rafy]

I don't know about that. Rees is leading O'Farrell as Preferred Premier by a small but decent margin. He's clearly made something of a good impression to people who hate Iemma.

Not so much a positive impression. Its just he wasn't Iemma. The last Newspoll was taken over the weeks following Rees' elevation to the leadership and nobody knew much about him. That, combined with the incumbency factor is mostly the reason for that preferred premier result.

I'd imagine the next Newspoll will see O'Farrell retake the PP lead. The last 2 months were vital for Rees. He was unknown and had to define himself. The mini-budget backlash and the continuing scandals are disastrous for him in that respect. He's put himself in the same basket as Iemma. The leadership change is a lost opportunity for the NSW ALP.

 

[Rafy]

Oh dear @ the Telegraph. Using an statisically useless online poll as the basis for a story.

Kevin Rudd 747 rates an 'F' with readers, failing Prime Minister

In contrast, Newspoll is out today. 55-45 (again), with Rudd's approval at 67% and disapproval at 20%.

It's also the first anniversary of the Rudd Government today.

 

[Trefoil]

Oh dear @ the Telegraph. Using an statisically useless online poll as the basis for a story.

Kevin Rudd 747 rates an 'F' with readers, failing Prime Minister

In contrast, Newspoll is out today. 55-45 (again), with Rudd's approval at 67% and disapproval at 20%.

It's also the first anniversary of the Rudd Government today.

Oh dear. I think that says more about The Daily Telegraph's reader base than anything.

And regardless of what anybody thinks of Rudd (I'm ambivalent personally), you've got to admit those are some astounding favourability ratings.