Whose gonna Lead the Liberal Party??? (1 Viewer)

Slidey

But pieces of what?
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
6,600
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Miles Edgeworth said:
You fucked up for a second there sunshine, if you think Libertarians or any nutcase an-caps are nationlanists you've got another thing coming :p

The dissenters are merely SOCIALISTS.
Yeah I know. :p

I don't even think all Libertarians agree with the Cato Institute. But man do. And many claim un-Americanism when questioned. It's annoying.

zimmerman8k said:
Yeah fuck off refugee cunts. They need to assimilate to true blue aussie values. I never picked you as the type that would say this bullshit.
Actually, I realised I'd typed 'refugee' when I went to bed. I'd been drinking when I typed that, but I meant immigrant. I am fully in support of Australia accepting valid refugee cases. I was severely dissapointed in I think it was Sweden or the UK that turned away a homosexual Iranian who would face the death penalty for homosexuality if he went back to Iran.

However, if you think Australia should welcome immigrants who can't assimilate, you're a tool... especially when we have more 'supply' of immigrants than 'demand'.

Stop thinking the word 'assimilate' is somehow dirty. Bottom line is you don't want people in this country (or you want fewer) who, say, have no sense of personal property, or no sense of female equality.
 
Last edited:

Snaykew

:)
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
538
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Do I have to wear a wifebeater to become a full Australian? :p
 

Slidey

But pieces of what?
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
6,600
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Snaykew said:
Do I have to wear a wifebeater to become a full Australian? :p
They're actually pretty comfortable, man.
 

jb_nc

Google "9-11" and "truth"
Joined
Dec 20, 2004
Messages
5,391
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
withoutaface said:
Menya is run by migrants.
i think of me buying a meal there is one step closer them going back to where they came from.
 

Snaykew

:)
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
538
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Hey man, everyone enjoys a good barbecue, no matter who you are.
 

Slidey

But pieces of what?
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
6,600
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
zimmerman8k said:
Fundamentalist Islam is the exception not the rule. If people have no respect for our laws, then sure, its best if the don't immigrate here.

But generally speaking I see no need to assimilate. If people have different cultures and lifestyles I'm happy for them to continue then.

But I think we're talking at cross purposes here. Im talking more about the bullshit like the suggestion immigrants should know about Don Bradman and Pavlova and enjoy Barbecues.
Yeah fair enough.
 

Snaykew

:)
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
538
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaat. How can you not enjoy a family get together in your backyard with whatever food you want really? D:

But no, it's not an issue. Anyone who thinks so is a spastic.
 

Snaykew

:)
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
538
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
zimmerman8k said:
Maybe vegetarians and stuff. I'm guessing a BBQ would be no fun without meat.
Onion sandwich with tomato sauce?
 

Slidey

But pieces of what?
Joined
Jun 12, 2004
Messages
6,600
Gender
Male
HSC
2005
Actually, you can have a decent vege burger if the host has some patties handy.

Otherwise, yeah, it's the onion sandwich with tomato sauce option. Personally I just go with snacking on plain old bread.
 

Snaykew

:)
Joined
Apr 11, 2006
Messages
538
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
To be fair, fresh plain bread isn't bad. It's actually pretty good.
 

Lentern

Active Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
4,980
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
Piyom said:
That's a good question... it seems like the Liberal party have runout of leaders.
I met Tony Abbott during the WYD and we took photos with him but I don't think he would be the Right choice.
Don't Liberal Party have any more leaders... what would happen to this party in 4 yrs time.
May be the party need new recruits...
Costello and Turnbull are both "electable" don't ask me to explain the formula for "electable" it's ridiculous the factors that come into it but in the end it means they are capable of cultivating an image of competent, reasonably likeable(less important then competence but not irellevant) and they need to have nous about them. Beazley, Rudd, Hawke, Howard, Peacock, all had it, Latham, Crean, Hewson, Downer did not. Keating is an interesting case, he did not have it but he never campaigned from opposition so he still won an election, campaigning from government is different than from opposition.

But federal politics is all about timing, Dr Nelson for all his ability as a politician, which whilst not that of Rudd or Turnbull is still substantial, will never win an election because of his timing. With a change of government allways comes a degree of goodwill towards the new government from the electorate. Australians do that, like it or not, Howard, Hawke, Whitlam and Keating all polled highest almost straight after taking government. Same goes for Carr, Bracks, Beatie, Rann etc, The exception to the rule is Fraser but Mal was copping a fair bit of flack for his role in the dismissal. Point being whoever was the first liberal leader after re-election was allways going to carry the curse that many other competent politicians sufffered, Beazley, Peacock, Whitlam, Snedden, we have not had a post war one term government and with the current intensity of politics you will not get too bites at it, you lose once and that's it.

So the sad news for Dr Nelson is that although not entirely useless, he will never be elected. He probably won't make it to the next election but Costello and Turnbull would be going gaga to try and take it for themselves, Rudd should't struggle to be re-elected once, but try it a second time against a talented politician and you've got a battle on your hands. We may see Abbott or Bishop try and take over from Nelson before the election, they are not very "electable" so they know it's a real now or never thing for them but they could get lucky, labor may have a meltdown, Julia might attempt a leadership coup or something, but it's near impossible.

Ultimately my money is on Costello, having been in the party for as long as he has and done so much for it as Treasurer and deputy leader he has far and away the largest following and can probably bide his time without too much trouble. Although Turnbull is electable, he is a very new member of parliament and may need to go for it whilst he has the chance.

Now in the case of the libs having an absolute melt down and doing the unthinkable in destroying three potential prime ministers before 2010,(they've allready destroyed Nelson) then the next biggest chance is probably Hockey. But who knows what other talent might have emerged on the liberal frontbench by 2013, Christopher Pyne seems to have a decent future ahead of him, and who knows the lemmins who installed Latham to lead the labor party might orchestrate a coup and install someone like Gillard or Fitzgibbon.

Moral of the story is when it comes to campaigning from opposition, the trick is to keep safe people like Turnbull, Costello and Nelson at the forefront and wait till people get sick of the incumbent government. You don't decide to shake things up abit by bringing in an Abott or a Minchin.
 

spiny norman

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
884
Location
Rivo
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
Lentern said:
Australians do that, like it or not, Howard, Hawke, Whitlam and Keating all polled highest almost straight after taking government.
Wha? Hawke and Howard had substantial swings against them in 1984 and 1998. Whitlam, too, had a slight swing against him in 1974. Your one exception, Fraser, had a smaller swing to him in 1977 than all but Whitlam (and Keating, who granted had a big swing to him). So what are you on about??

Keating, Holt, Curtin and Bruce are the only occasions of incumbent PMs having swings to them their first election after coming to government (Fraser, too, if you count him as the incumbent of '75).
 

Lentern

Active Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
4,980
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
spiny norman said:
Wha? Hawke and Howard had substantial swings against them in 1984 and 1998. Whitlam, too, had a slight swing against him in 1974. Your one exception, Fraser, had a smaller swing to him in 1977 than all but Whitlam (and Keating, who granted had a big swing to him). So what are you on about??

Keating, Holt, Curtin and Bruce are the only occasions of incumbent PMs having swings to them their first election after coming to government (Fraser, too, if you count him as the incumbent of '75).
I don't mean they allways had swings to them at the next election, but opinion polling in the early months of a new government is allways favourable. This goodwill polling doesn't allways last the entire term, in fact it shouldn't in the case of a competent opposition but it still gives them a headstart going into into the next election, a headstart which has proved quite substantial. Now in their six months after taking government Whitlam, Hawke and Rudd all enjoyed astronomical approval ratings, Howard less so but he still enjoyed a huge lead. By contrast Frasers approval rating was higher as an opposition leader than as prime minister.

-New governments enjoy opinion poll boosts generally
-One term government doesn't exist in modern professional politics.
-The opposition leader to contest a governments first re-election attempt never goes on to win government.
That is what I am going on about and both the history and the present support these assertions. Your points whilst accurate, are moot.
 
Last edited:

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top