Politics Super Thread - keep it all in here

[guyofthetiger]

Well the ABC's Vote Compass would suggest otherwise:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-16/vote-compass-malcolm-turnbull-tony-abbott/7413770

And before you shriek "OMG, leftist ABC what a surprise," have a read of the article first.

46% of Coalition voters were either somewhat or much less likely to vote Coalition if Abbott were still there.

I'm the far right would have swallowed "Ummmm ahhhh Stop the boats, ummmmm ahhhh axe the tax," though.

The article, regardless of who wrote it, does not deal with what I discussed. It has also been proved wrong, with the benefit of hindsight showing that where it mattered, in the marginal seats, it did matter to voters that Abbott was axed - big time!

It was also written a month and a half ago, before Turnbull dished out the most limp wristed and ineffective election campaign in living memory.

I pointed out that Abbott would have fought tooth and nail and hammered home the slogans and one liners. You may laugh at "axe the tax" and "stop the boats", but they delivered him a landslide victory only 30 months ago.

The same way that dumb Australians swallowed the "Privatise Medicare" scare campaign that Labor unleashed, this is simply what the bogan majority respond to. All Turnbull could come up with during an 8 week campaign was to reduce Super benefits to an aging population, and to Tax Companies less. The bloke is a political myth who should have stuck to the boardroom.

We simply don't know how the Coalition would have fared under Abbott, but his election form shows without a shadow of a doubt he would have given the campaign a massive shake and gone down scratching and scraping like the best of them, unlike the bloke who knifed him in the back.

I didn't care about the Medicare scaremongering. The LNP will try to privatise certain facets of it (testing etc,) but the Australian public will never allow it. You'd actually find that I am a supporter of a co-payment for high earning Australians while leaving the system free for low income earners, pensioners and children.

I'm more concerned about this myth that the LNP are great economic managers whom have managed to get the country into even further debt under their watch. Their answer is not to take the money from TNC's and major businesses who dodge tax but from those who need it most.

I didn't vote for either party, I was hoping for a wider spread in both houses, which looks to be the case at least in the Senate. A wider range of opinions is what is required to break the strangehold that the ALP and LNP have on Australian politics and introduce some bipartisanship back into politics.

I agree.

Must admit I thought Shorten would back down, when he got hammered for his Medicare campaign.

It was good to see him show a bit of ticker. Everything he said was a hell of a lot more true than anything the LNP has had to say for 10 years.

The budget emergency being a prime example. After Labor had been lauded worldwide for its handling of the GFC.

Meanwhile, the LNP have been disastrous for the economy, persisting with the proven falsehood of trickle down economics.

And going so far as to destroy a world leading renewables economy worth more than 4 billion at the time and growing.

 

[Yossarian]

The LNP would have been slaughtered with Abbott there. Turnbull was their best bet because while he alienated the far right, he would have made up reasonable ground in centrist voters, and some from the centre left who are disenfranchised with the ALP.

I actually disagree, on the basis that it would have been an entirely different election had Abbott been involved.

Turnbull literally did not land a glove on Shorten for the entire campaign.

Abbott would have turned it into a political streetfight on issues like asylum seekers, border control, national debt, and union corruption. Issues that resonate with voters and that the Coalition has an undeniably better record on. Everybody knows negative campaigns work better than positive ones (well everybody except Malcolm Turnbull and whoever was his campaign director).

Not saying Abbott would have necessarily won, but he would have given Bill Shorten a bloodied nose and two black eyes in the process. After all, Abbott has beaten Labor in two previous elections, and its not outside the realms of possibility that he could have done so again against a dud opposition leader like Shorten.

Turnbull on the other hand … where do you start? His posh progressive lefty image lost him the vote across working class Sydney, and he didn't pull across any greens/labor voters who would never vote for the liberals anyway. He was a dud Liberal leader in 2009, and he stuck true to form in 2016.

For these reasons, even if Turnbull does form a majority, his job is on the line…

Problem being if they only have a majority of one they can't really put anyone offside.

 

[Nelson]

Abbott would have turned it into a political streetfight on issues like asylum seekers, border control, national debt, and union corruption. Issues that resonate with voters and that the Coalition has an undeniably better record on. Everybody knows negative campaigns work better than positive ones (well everybody except Malcolm Turnbull and whoever was his campaign director).

Sure Abbott might have kept the voters that left the Liberals to vote for One Nation but he would have alienated a whole lot more. He had no credibility and had demonstrated such arrogance and poor judgment in his time as leader that he was ousted by his own party, and only the most rabid of conservative social commentators raised much of a whimper over his demise.

I don't think "union corruption" is generally an issue that resonates with voters. I doubt it's much on the radar for most people at all. Both parties take a harsh stance on border control now, so that's a pretty useless scare campaign. I doubt they're particularly far apart on asylum seekers either. As to debt well the Liberals have had the last couple of years to deal with it and it hasn't improved yet, nor is it trending to improve. That's a problem that's going to take some political courage to deal with and neither major party has shown anywhere near the guts of late to properly tackle it. Everything's about the next election cycle.

 

[Snake]

Abbott would have turned it into a political streetfight on issues like asylum seekers, border control, national debt, and union corruption. Issues that resonate with voters and that the Coalition has an undeniably better record on. Everybody knows negative campaigns work better than positive ones (well everybody except Malcolm Turnbull and whoever was his campaign director).

Sure Abbott might have kept the voters that left the Liberals to vote for One Nation but he would have alienated a whole lot more. He had no credibility and had demonstrated such arrogance and poor judgment in his time as leader that he was ousted by his own party, and only the most rabid of conservative social commentators raised much of a whimper over his demise.

I don't think "union corruption" is generally an issue that resonates with voters. I doubt it's much on the radar for most people at all. Both parties take a harsh stance on border control now, so that's a pretty useless scare campaign. I doubt they're particularly far apart on asylum seekers either. As to debt well the Liberals have had the last couple of years to deal with it and it hasn't improved yet, nor is it trending to improve. That's a problem that's going to take some political courage to deal with and neither major party has shown anywhere near the guts of late to properly tackle it. Everything's about the next election cycle.

I must reply to your last sentence ..Abbott did have the courage in his first budget to do exactly what you wanted make the tough calls …we all know the electorate would have no part of it ! .In regards to the senate it is going to be more hostile as ever and we have to remember they will be there for 6yrs as it is a totally new senate ,that is 2 election cycles .
My advice to all on this site is try as hard as hell to clear a major slice of your debt as the financial Armageddon is not far away the time to pay the piper is approaching the goods times are over.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Even if the LNP do manage to form a minority government, it looks like they will get nothing through the Senate. The ALP and Greens look like they will get enough seats to come together and block any legislation the LNP tries to pass. Moreover, the absolute crapstorm of minor parties Malcs and co will have to deal with be like trying to herd cats.

 

[Nelson]

I must reply to your last sentence ..Abbott did have the courage in his first budget to do exactly what you wanted make the tough calls …we all know the electorate would have no part of it ! .In regards to the senate it is going to be more hostile as ever and we have to remember they will be there for 6yrs as it is a totally new senate ,that is 2 election cycles .
My advice to all on this site is try as hard as hell to clear a major slice of your debt as the financial Armageddon is not far away the time to pay the piper is approaching the goods times are over.

It's not just about making tough calls though it's about making the right calls and selling it well to the public as well. As an example cuts to education (which were part of the 2013 budget) are generally seen as short sighted and to make them a part of structural budget reform (i.e. a long term plan to dedicate less to education) was always going to be deeply unpopular. As a generality you are going to put offside teachers, the student population, parents of young kids and those that feel guilt at having received free tertiary education. Economists are also going to smash you for being short-sighted. So if you want to make meaningful long term changes to the budget you should probably look elsewhere (at least in the first instance).

Not all of the senate will be there for 6 years. In a double dissolution the top half of elected senators in each state (so the first 6 across the line) get a 6 year term and the bottom half only get a 3 year term.

 

[Abraham]

I don't think "union corruption" is generally an issue that resonates with voters. I doubt it's much on the radar for most people at all. Both parties take a harsh stance on border control now, so that's a pretty useless scare campaign. I doubt they're particularly far apart on asylum seekers either. As to debt well the Liberals have had the last couple of years to deal with it and it hasn't improved yet, nor is it trending to improve. That's a problem that's going to take some political courage to deal with and neither major party has shown anywhere near the guts of late to properly tackle it. Everything's about the next election cycle.

I wont reply point by point because we would be responding to each other with essays before you know it.

However whatever he did during the course of his tenure wouldn't matter so much when it comes to the election campaign. Abbott and his election advisers beat two much more credentialed prime ministers than Bill Shorten (albeit from opposition), with his aggressive and focussed campaign style.

He would have definitely won the Western Sydney seats which have ultimately cost Turnbull the chance to form a majority. And its not like Turnbull managed to save any seats that would have gone to Labor anyway.

When people typically fill out their voting slips, they remember the one liners and the slogans and the issues that have been front and centre during the election campaign. Abbott would have made sure of that. He would have made sure Bill Shorten limped to the finish line.

Notice I never said Abbott would definitely have won, I said he would have put up a much better fight, and the Liberals could have walked away with their heads held high regardless of the result. Instead they are in the exact same position Labor was in back in 2010, and its only due to Liberal incompetence that Labor has managed to even get back in the game all these years later.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Why can't the payments administration be privatised?

Using random numbers, let's say the administration process costs the government $1b. Why couldn't they tender to the private sector who could do it for say $500m?

The Medicare back office should be privatised asap, as it's the most inefficient and costly system imaginable.

However that's not what labor's lies focussed on, which was that somewhere in the universe there exists a private organisation that would buy Medicare, make $0.00 revenue, and bleed money forever more.

They just joined some dots, $5m was outlaid for a review of the payments system…..that's politics.

Bit like that budget emergency we had in 2013.

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

I must reply to your last sentence ..Abbott did have the courage in his first budget to do exactly what you wanted make the tough calls …we all know the electorate would have no part of it ! .In regards to the senate it is going to be more hostile as ever and we have to remember they will be there for 6yrs as it is a totally new senate ,that is 2 election cycles .
My advice to all on this site is try as hard as hell to clear a major slice of your debt as the financial Armageddon is not far away the time to pay the piper is approaching the goods times are over.

He made the tough calls, but it was all on the spending side. The electorate is pretty clear in my opinion that they don't want services to fall in any form.

How many times do these politicians need to be told by Treasury we have a revenue issue? The tax base needs to be broadened and that means taxation reform. Taxation reform is the more courageous action for a politician, not simply cutting spending and turning society against each other by labelling "leaners" and "lifters".

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I must reply to your last sentence ..Abbott did have the courage in his first budget to do exactly what you wanted make the tough calls …we all know the electorate would have no part of it ! .In regards to the senate it is going to be more hostile as ever and we have to remember they will be there for 6yrs as it is a totally new senate ,that is 2 election cycles .
My advice to all on this site is try as hard as hell to clear a major slice of your debt as the financial Armageddon is not far away the time to pay the piper is approaching the goods times are over.

He made the tough calls, but it was all on the spending side. The electorate is pretty clear in my opinion that they don't want services to fall in any form.

How may times do these politicians need to be told by Treasury we have a revenue issue? The tax base needs to be broadened and that means taxation reform. Taxation reform is the more courageous action for a politician, not simply cutting spending and turning society against each other by labelling "leaners" and "lifters".

Most of the Calls he made unfortunately , were going to affect mostly the ones who couldn't afford it . He went very softly on his mates at The big end of town, and continued on his middle class welfare, and insisted on trying to get a ridiculous Childcare policy through . One that we couldn't possible afford , and mainly consisted of giving more money , to people , who in most cases didn't need More Welfare.
It's amazing that some of the Rabid Libs think he could have possibly won this election,
Abbott was as popular as a pig in a Mosque with most voters
His mates in News Limited still thin

 

[goldcoast_tiger]

I must reply to your last sentence ..Abbott did have the courage in his first budget to do exactly what you wanted make the tough calls …we all know the electorate would have no part of it ! .In regards to the senate it is going to be more hostile as ever and we have to remember they will be there for 6yrs as it is a totally new senate ,that is 2 election cycles .
My advice to all on this site is try as hard as hell to clear a major slice of your debt as the financial Armageddon is not far away the time to pay the piper is approaching the goods times are over.

He made the tough calls, but it was all on the spending side. The electorate is pretty clear in my opinion that they don't want services to fall in any form.

How may times do these politicians need to be told by Treasury we have a revenue issue? The tax base needs to be broadened and that means taxation reform. Taxation reform is the more courageous action for a politician, not simply cutting spending and turning society against each other by labelling "leaners" and "lifters".

Most of the Calls he made unfortunately , were going to affect mostly the ones who couldn't afford it . He went very softly on his mates at The big end of town, and continued on his middle class welfare, and insisted on trying to get a ridiculous Childcare policy through . One that we couldn't possible afford , and mainly consisted of giving more money , to people , who in most cases didn't need More Welfare.
It's amazing that some of the Rabid Libs think he could have possibly won this election,
Abbott was as popular as a pig in a Mosque with most voters
His mates in News Limited and some of his earlier supporters still love him, but not many other people do.
Remember why they dumped him for "the Messiah", it was because most of the electorate were well and truly over him , his stupid acts, and his lies.

 

[stryker]

That must have destroyed Turnbull having to tell kevvy-o-sevvy that he missed out on our endorsement.
LOL
I bet they both cried….

 

[Yossarian]

He was never going to get the job. They should have just nominated him and let him lose.

 

[stryker]

Finally…finally Malcolm Turnbull has stood up and defended himself and his party and acted like a strong leader of his country.

Labor DID open our borders and allow people smugglers to operate in our vicinity
Labor ARE the ones who encouraged desperate people to board shonky boats and risk their lives.
Labor's policies DID result in 1200 deaths at sea
Labor's policies DID result in 50 000 illegal arrivals
Labor's policies DID cost this country over $12 billion with a worse result than what we already had
Labor ARE responsible for the detention camps

The Liberals are far from perfect but one thing they are not is weak on border control Rudd and Gillard caused people to die...that is far worse than anything Abbot and Turnbull have ever done and its about time that is reported correctly.

 

[Byron_Bay_Fan]

The LIbs polices resulted in billions of dollars wasted on immoral/illegal detentions of refugees. Oz helped create the refugees by our policies in the Middle East for past 70 years. We also helped exasperate terrorism for the same period.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Are the LNP still keeping the information of the waters classified? We wouldn't know how many people are dying on the water as they are "operational matters."

 

[sheer64]

The LIbs polices resulted in billions of dollars wasted on immoral/illegal detentions of refugees. **Oz helped create the refugees by our policies in the Middle East for past 70 years. We also helped exasperate terrorism for the same period.**

So true. When you throw a pebble in a pond you create ripples.

 

[jadtiger]

The LIbs polices resulted in billions of dollars wasted on immoral/illegal detentions of refugees. Oz helped create the refugees by our policies in the Middle East for past 70 years. We also helped exasperate terrorism for the same period.

It is all about cause and effect. Just about all of the political problems in the world can be traced back to the actions of misguided previous generations and self interest.

 

[stryker]

The LIbs polices resulted in billions of dollars wasted on immoral/illegal detentions of refugees. Oz helped create the refugees by our policies in the Middle East for past 70 years. We also helped exasperate terrorism for the same period.

They haven't wasted one dollar as far as I'm concerned.
…as for your middle east line....you wouldn't have a bloody clue. You just sit in suburbia and throw uninformed insults at your own people. You've never been anywhere near a conflict.

 

[Flippedy]

The LIbs polices resulted in billions of dollars wasted on immoral/illegal detentions of refugees. Oz helped create the refugees by our policies in the Middle East for past 70 years. We also helped exasperate terrorism for the same period.

They haven't wasted one dollar as far as I'm concerned.
…as for your middle east line....**you wouldn't have a bloody clue.** You just sit in suburbia and throw uninformed insults at your own people. You've never been anywhere near a conflict.

And you would? Would any of us on here actually have a clue? The whole politics thread is just full of fluff opinions with personal bias, nothing more.